Marujo - 2011 - Storm Surge Hydrodynamic Modelling

Storm surge hydrodynamic modelling
Nuno Ricardo Costa Marujo da Silva
In partial fulfilment of the requirements for obtaining the Degree of

Master of Science in
Civil Engineering
Jury
President: Prof. Dr. Antnio Jorge Silva Guerreiro Monteiro (IST)
Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Antnio Alexandre Trigo Teixeira (IST)
Co-supervisor: Dr. Maria Amlia Vieira da Costa Arajo (IST)
Vogal: Dr. Conceio Juana Espinosa Morais Fortes (LNEC)
October 2011
ii
Abstract
th th
In the present thesis a storm surge event, which hit the Portuguese coast between 14 - 16
October 1987, is modelled using the ADCIRC model (Luettich et al., 1992). Considering the two
hydrodynamic scales existing in the interest area, the simulations considered two different
domains to account for different processes. A large domain including part of the Atlantic Ocean
was used to simulate the storm surge event along the Portuguese coast and a second smaller
domain to capture the Lima estuary storm surge response.
Prior to simulations, a field survey was carried out to create a local geoid undulation model
(LGUM) and improve the existing bathymetry in the Lima estuary. In this survey, GNSS devices
were used to acquire data in identified areas, where information was lacking, and ellipsoidal
heights in geodetic and levelling marks. The acquired data were post processed and combined
with the existing datasets to create a LGUM and a Digital Terrain Model (DTM) for the Lima
estuary.
The two models used were calibrated using the astronomy forcing and changing the most
important model parameters. Thereafter the interaction between astronomy and meteorology
was assessed considering these jointly and separately. The river flow was considered as a
meteorological forcing agent for the estuarine domain.
The obtained results show a preponderance of the friction coefficient over other parameters and
the importance of considering a variable Coriolis parameter for large domains in latitude. The
meteorology was found to have non linear interaction with the astronomy in both domains, even
when considering the river flow.
Keywords: Storm surge, Lima estuary, ADCIRC model, wetting/ drying, inverted barometer
effect, river flow, geoidal undulation model
iii
iv
Resumo
Na presente dissertao o evento de sobreelevao do nvel do mar de origem meteorolgica,

que atingiu a costa Portuguesa no perodo de 14 a 16 de Outubro de 1987, simulado
utilizando o modelo ADCIRC (Luettich et al., 1992). Considerando as duas escalas
hidrodinmicas presentes na rea de interesse dividiu-se o estudo em duas etapas. Um
domnio de dimenso maior, incluindo parte do Oceano Atlntico, foi considerado para simular
a hidrodinmica do fenmeno ao longo da costa Portuguesa. Um segundo domnio foi
estudado para avaliar a resposta do esturio do Lima a estes eventos meteorolgicos.
Um trabalho de campo foi realizado para criar um modelo local de ondulao do geide
(MLOG) e melhorar a informao batimtrica existente para o esturio do rio Lima. Neste
trabalho foi utilizado equipamento GNSS para recolher informao nas reas deficitrias,
anteriormente identificadas, e obter as altitudes elipsoidais em vrtices geodsicos e marcas de
nivelamento. Os dados obtidos foram processados e combinados com os existentes para criar
um MLOG e um modelo digital do terreno (DTM) para o esturio do Lima.
Posteriormente procedeu-se calibrao do modelo, para cada um destes domnios, com base
no foramento astronmico e alterando os parmetros considerados mais importantes do
modelo. Seguidamente procedeu-se anlise da interao entre a astronomia e a
meteorologia modelando estes separadamente e conjuntamente. O caudal fluvial foi
considerado tambm como agente meteorolgico para o domnio estuarino.
Os resultados obtidos mostram a importncia do coeficiente de atrito em relao aos outros

parmetros de calibrao e a importncia de considerar um factor de Coriolis varivel em
domnios extensos em latitude. Foi observada em ambos os domnios transferncia de energia
entre o foramento astronmico e meteorolgico, tambm quando considerado o caudal fluvial.
Palavras-chave: Sobreelevao de origem meteorolgica, Esturio do Rio Lima, modelo

ADCIRC, secagem/molhagem, efeito baromtrico inverso, caudal fluvial, modelo de ondulao
do geide.
v
WAVES (adapted from [1])
Waves of sound bounce in echoes

Repetitive, soothing,
Filling the void of loneliness,
Placing the spirit in touch with
Other peopleOther placesOther times
Waves of light create sight

Recognition and appreciation
Of surroundings comforts the
Troubled heart with the salves of
Beauty and sunlights warmth
Waves of oceans crash and roar

Ebbs and flows of inspirational rhythm
Filling each observer with
The sights and sounds
Of the human souls rebirth
vi
Acknowledgements
First, I would like to offer my sincere thanks to my supervisor Prof. Dr. Antnio Trigo Teixeira for
his guidance, availability to answer and clarify all my questions, all the knowledge transmitted
and for the support and absence of any obstacle to the six months of study abroad in the Delft
University of Technology (The Netherlands) coexisting with the elaboration of the present
dissertation.
My sincere thanks to Dr. Amlia Arajo for her guidance and readiness to explain some of the
details of previous research on this topic. This cooperation served as a starting point for the
development of the present dissertation. Assistance was also provided on many issues that
emerged during the investigation of this thesis.
Andrea Mazzolari must also be thanked for his support and all the advice given from his
previous experience and research on this topic, which were consistently accurate and useful,
and has helped setting the course to some solutions.
Moreover, I would like to thank also Prof. Ana Paula Falco for all the knowledge transmitted
related to GISs, for taking part in the survey and for the help in the post processing of the data
obtained during the field survey.
Furthermore, I would like to thank Prof. Alexandre Gonalves for the support and for taking part
in the field work and to Eng. Ndia Braz, representing the LNEC, for taking part in this project
and loaning very precise GNSS instruments.
My gratitude to my parents for the unconditional and immeasurable support during my academic
life and for helping me while studying abroad. Also to my brother for his importance in my life
and advices in a multitude of aspects.
In addition, thanks to all my friends which have helped me grow as a person, supporting and
advising me when necessary and being an important part of my life. Especially Miguel Paleta,
Jules LOrtye and Seth Eichenthal for being true friends from the moment I met them.
vii
Table of contents
Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... iii
Resumo ......................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... vii
List of figures .................................................................................................................................xi
List of tables .................................................................................................................................xv
List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... xvii
List of Symbols .......................................................................................................................... xviii
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Problem definition .......................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Goals and methodology ................................................................................................ 2
1.3 Structure ........................................................................................................................ 3
2 An elevation model for the Lima estuary ............................................................................... 4
2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 4
2.2 Existing altimetry and bathymetry data for the studied area ......................................... 5
2.2.1 Coordinate systems description ................................................................................ 7
2.2.2 Available data analysis .............................................................................................. 7
2.3 Data collection ............................................................................................................... 8
2.3.1 General aspects ........................................................................................................ 8
2.3.2 Survey preparation .................................................................................................... 9
2.3.3 Survey results .......................................................................................................... 10
2.3.4 Local geoidal undulation model ............................................................................... 13
2.4 Creation of the combined digital terrain model (DTM) ................................................ 16
2.5 Final notes ................................................................................................................... 17
3 Literature review .................................................................................................................. 19
3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 19
3.2 General concepts ........................................................................................................ 19
3.2.1 Sea level .................................................................................................................. 19
3.2.2 Astronomic tide ........................................................................................................ 20
3.2.3 Storm surge ............................................................................................................. 22
3.3 Time series analysis .................................................................................................... 24
3.4 Worldwide storm surge modelling ............................................................................... 26
3.4.1 Domain size influence ............................................................................................. 26
3.4.2 Grid convergence .................................................................................................... 27
3.4.3 Astronomy and meteorology interaction .................................................................. 28
3.5 Historical analysis of the storm surge phenomena along the Portuguese coast ........ 29
3.6 Previous storm surge modelling for the Portuguese coast ......................................... 30
3.6.1 Initial approach ........................................................................................................ 30
3.6.2 Improved model setup ............................................................................................. 32
th th
3.6.3 The 14 16 October 1987 storm modelling ........................................................ 35
viii
3.7 Modelling concepts ...................................................................................................... 37
4 Numerical model description ............................................................................................... 39
4.1 ADCIRC model ............................................................................................................ 39
4.1.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 39
4.1.2 Model description .................................................................................................... 40
4.1.3 Finite element mesh ................................................................................................ 43
4.1.3.1 SMS mesh generation tools ............................................................................ 44
4.1.3.2 Size function definition ................................................................................... 45
4.1.4 Model setup process description ............................................................................. 46
4.1.4.1 General options ............................................................................................... 46
4.1.4.2 Domain definition and boundary conditions .................................................. 46
4.1.4.3 Model setup parameters ................................................................................. 47
4.1.4.4 Time options.................................................................................................... 49
4.2 Model performance analysis ....................................................................................... 49
5 Existing data analysis .......................................................................................................... 51
5.1 Atmospheric pressure data ......................................................................................... 51
5.2 Viana do Castelo tidal gauge record ........................................................................... 55
5.2.1 Separation of the astronomical and the meteorological part of the record ............. 55
5.2.2 Time series stationarity assessment ....................................................................... 58
6 Storm surge modelling for the oceanic domain ................................................................... 59
6.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 59
6.2 Model setup ................................................................................................................. 59
6.3 Model calibration ......................................................................................................... 62
6.3.1 Initial scenario (SCN_0)........................................................................................... 62
6.3.2 Friction coefficient .................................................................................................... 63
6.3.3 Wave continuity ....................................................................................................... 66
6.3.4 Lateral viscosity ....................................................................................................... 68
6.3.5 Boundary condition type assessment ...................................................................... 69
6.3.6 Final calibration ....................................................................................................... 70
6.4 Model validation........................................................................................................... 72
6.4.1 Convergence analysis ............................................................................................. 72
6.4.2 Harmonic analysis ................................................................................................... 74
6.5 Assessment of other aspects ...................................................................................... 76
6.5.1 Coriolis option assessment ..................................................................................... 76
6.5.2 Analysis of a different number of tidal constituents ................................................. 78
6.5.3 Analysis of the influence of the domain size and mesh generation criteria ............ 81
th th
6.6 The 14 -16 October 1987 storm modelling .............................................................. 84
6.6.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 84
6.6.2 Model setup ............................................................................................................. 86
ix
6.6.3 Pressure and wind influence ................................................................................... 87
6.6.4 Assessment of astronomy and meteorology forcing interaction.............................. 88
7 Storm surge modelling for the Lima estuary ....................................................................... 89
7.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 89
7.2 Model setup ................................................................................................................. 90
7.2.1 General considerations............................................................................................ 90
7.2.2 Model instabilities assessment ................................................................................ 92
7.2.3 Final model setup .................................................................................................... 94
7.3 Model calibration ......................................................................................................... 95
7.3.1 Initial scenario - SCN_0_EST .................................................................................. 96
7.3.2 Calibration scenarios ............................................................................................... 97
7.4 Model validation........................................................................................................... 98
7.5 Storm surge modelling for the Lima estuary ............................................................... 99
7.5.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 99
7.5.2 Lima river flow data ................................................................................................. 99
7.5.3 Influence of the domain size .................................................................................. 100
7.5.4 Surge assessment in the river estuary using only meteorology forcing ................ 101
7.5.5 Assessment of the astronomy, meteorology and river flow influence ................... 102
8 Final considerations........................................................................................................... 104
8.1 Concluding remarks................................................................................................... 104
8.2 Future developments ................................................................................................. 105
References ................................................................................................................................ 107
Websites ................................................................................................................................ 111
Appendixes ................................................................................................................................ 112
Appendix A Viana do Castelo tide table ............................................................................. 112
Appendix B - T_TIDE output .................................................................................................. 114
Appendix C Tidal gauges data............................................................................................ 118
Appendix D Harmonic analysis for model validation .......................................................... 119
Appendix E Mesh generation .............................................................................................. 121
Appendix F Model calibration for the estuarine domain initial scenario .......................... 122
x
List of figures
Figure 1.1 Lima estuary and Viana do Castelo as seen from the South bank during the survey
(taken in September 2010). ........................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2.1 Schematic representation of the different tidal and reference levels (adapted from
[2]). ................................................................................................................................................ 4
Figure 2.2 Topographic map of Viana do Castelo scale 1:25000 from IGEOE. ........................ 5
Figure 2.3 Ortophotomaps for Viana do Castelo, Lima estuary and river Lima. ........................ 6
Figure 2.4 Polygons representing areas without or with insufficient elevation data. Points with
known elevation are represented in yellow. .................................................................................. 8
Figure 2.5 Visited geodetic (red) and levelling marks (yellow) (Google Earth). ....................... 10
Figure 2.6 Survey equipment used for the acquisition of position and altimetry data.............. 10
Figure 2.7 Example of a triangulation mark (Roques) with the antenna and the recording
equipment. ................................................................................................................................... 11
Figure 2.8 Example of a benchmark (MN27) with the antenna and the recording equipment. 11
Figure 2.9 Planimetric position of the surveyed points (represented in pink). ......................... 13
Figure 2.10 Local geoid undulation model for Viana do Castelo area (Falco et al., 2011). ... 15
Figure 2.11 Combined bathymetric elevation model. ............................................................... 17
Figure 2.12 Summer and winter general profiles [6]. ............................................................... 18
Figure 3.1 Separation of the astronomic tide and residuals for the Viana do Castelo tidal
gauge in October 1987 [adapted from Arajo et al., 2010]. ........................................................ 26
Figure 3.2 Track of hurricane Kate through the western North Atlantic Ocean into the Gulf of
Mexico from 1800 UTM November 15, 1985 to 1800 UTM November 23, 1985 and approximate
domains modelled. Continuous line Florida coast domain, dashed line Gulf of Mexico
domain and dotted line East coast domain (adapted from Blain et al., 1994). ........................ 27
Figure 3.3 Schematic representation of a smeared or damped inverted barometer forcing
function over a coarse grid discretization (adapted from Blain et al. 1998). ............................... 28
Figure 3.4 Effect of the number of elements in the wave shape [adapted from Howlett (2005)].
..................................................................................................................................................... 28
Figure 3.5 Comparison between the storm surge height for Leixes tidal gauge and the
atmospheric pressure change recorded at the meteorological station of Pedras Rubras.
(adapted from Taborda and Dias, 1992). .................................................................................... 30
Figure 3.6 Computational domain, extending for 400 km along the West Iberian Coast and
615 km into the Atlantic Ocean [adapted from Arajo et al., (2010(a)]. ...................................... 31
Figure 3.7 Unstructured mesh with triangular elements generated for the computational
domain with 30360 nodes and 59527 elements designated as Grid12 [adapted from Arajo et
al., (2010(a)]. ............................................................................................................................... 31
Figure 3.8 Comparison between the recorded water surface elevation and the obtained results
at the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge for the meteorological and astronomical forcings jointly and
separately [adapted from Arajo et al., 2010(a)]. ........................................................................ 32
xi
Figure 3.9 Computed time series at the Viana do Castelo reference station for Grid4 and
Grid4F2 for a model coastline boundary at a depth of 4 m [adapted from Mazzolari (2010)]..... 33
Figure 3.10 Comparison between the computed surge elevation for wind and pressure forcing
only and the inverted barometer effect from the sea level atmospheric pressure at the Viana do
Castelo tidal gauge [adapted from Mazzolari (2010)]. ................................................................ 34
Figure 3.11 New domain envelope and comparison with the previously used domain (yellow
area) [adapted from Mazzolari (2010)]. ....................................................................................... 34
Figure 3.12 Mesh DTM01 [adapted from Mazzolari (2010)]. ................................................... 35
Figure 3.13 Computed and observed water elevation at the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge for
the astronomical component during the storm period of October 1987 [adapted from Arajo et
al. (2010)]. ................................................................................................................................... 35
Figure 3.14 Observed and computed surge residuals for the event of October 1987 [adapted
from Arajo et al. (2011)]. ............................................................................................................ 36
Figure 3.15 Computed time series for the astronomical and meteorological forcing, applied
simultaneously and separately, and comparison with the sea level observations at the Viana do
Castelo tidal gauge [adapted from Arajo et al. (2011)]. ............................................................ 36
Figure 4.1 Modelling process sequence. ................................................................................. 42
Figure 5.1 Sea level atmospheric pressure from different sources for August 2002. .............. 52
Figure 5.2 Comparison of sea level atmospheric pressure from NOAA and ECMWF for the
year 1987..................................................................................................................................... 53
Figure 5.3 Comparison of sea level atmospheric pressure from NOAA and ECMWF for the
year 1991..................................................................................................................................... 53
Figure 5.4 Comparison of sea level atmospheric pressure from NOAA and ECMWF for
October 1987. .............................................................................................................................. 54
Figure 5.5 Observed astronomic tidal level after T_TIDE software package analysis for a
th th
different number of tidal harmonic constituents in the 13 17 October 1987 period. ............ 56
Figure 5.6 Difference between the observed tidal level considering 6 or 13 tidal constituents
th th
for the period 10 - 20 October 1987. ....................................................................................... 56
Figure 5.7 Observed meteorological residuals after T_TIDE software package analysis for
h th
different SNR values in the period 13 -17 October 1987. ........................................................ 57
Figure 6.1 Mesh M0 (based on DTM01), domain used in the simulations, mesh detail near the
Viana do Castelo tidal gauge and the location of the Viana do Castelo reference station. ........ 60
th th
Figure 6.2 Observed and modelled water surface elevation during the 13 -18 October 1987
period. .......................................................................................................................................... 63
Figure 6.3 Tidal prediction using T-Tide and the comparison with different friction coefficients
th th
for the period 13 -18 October 1987. ........................................................................................ 64
Figure 6.4 Differences between the observed and the ADCIRC model output for different
bottom friction coefficients. .......................................................................................................... 65
Figure 6.5 Computed and observed water surface elevation for different wave continuity
th th
factors in the period 14 16 October 1987. ............................................................................ 66
xii
th th
Figure 6.6 Computed differences for different wave continuity values in the period 14 16
October 1987. .............................................................................................................................. 67
Figure 6.7 Computed and observed water surface elevation for different lateral viscosity
factors. ......................................................................................................................................... 68
Figure 6.8 Comparison between the default mainland boundary condition and essential (with
and without slip)........................................................................................................................... 70
Figure 6.9 Comparison between observed values, initial and final calibration parameters
ADCIRC output. ........................................................................................................................... 71
th
Figure 6.10 Water surface elevation in the 14 October 1987, both observed and modelled in
the initial and final scenario. ........................................................................................................ 71
Figure 6.11 Differences between the ADCIRC initial and final calibration parameters output
and the observed values. ............................................................................................................ 72
Figure 6.12 Mesh M0R resulting from a single two-fold refinement of the M0 mesh. The M0R
mesh has 474624 (118656) elements and 240187 (60766) nodes (comparison to mesh M0). . 73
Figure 6.13 Computed values for the M0 and the M0R mesh and respective differences at the
Viana do Castelo tidal gauge. ..................................................................................................... 73
Figure 6.14 Location of the 8 tidal gauge stations considered in the harmonic analysis using
mesh M0. ..................................................................................................................................... 74
Figure 6.15 Model output using 13 harmonic constituents and observed values for the period
th th
14 - 18 October 1987............................................................................................................... 79
Figure 6.16 Model output using 10 harmonic constituents and observed values for the period
th th
14 - 18 October 1987............................................................................................................... 79
Figure 6.17 Differences between computed and observed water surface elevations using 6
and all the constituents from the Le Provost database. .............................................................. 80
Figure 6.18 Differences between computed and observed water surface elevations using 6
and 10 harmonic constituents. .................................................................................................... 80
Figure 6.19 Mesh M1 with 156348 nodes and 306022 elements. ........................................... 82
Figure 6.20 Mesh M2 with 73101 nodes and 141652 elements. ............................................. 82
Figure 6.21 Comparison between different meshes for the same model parameters. ............ 83
Figure 6.22 Comparison between different meshes for the same model parameters. ............ 83
th
Figure 6.23 Sea level atmospheric pressure in Pascal for the studied domain for (a) 14
th th
October 1987 00:00 UTM, (b) 14 October 1987 12:00 UTM, (c) 15 October 1987 00:00 UTM
th th th
(d) 15 October 1987 06:00 UTM (e) 15 October 1987 12:00 UTM (f) 15 October 1987 18:00
th
UTM (g) 16 October 1987 00:00 UTM. (Kalnay et al., 1996. Courtesy of NOAA/ESRL Physical
Sciences Division at http://www.esrl.noaa .gov). ........................................................................ 85
Figure 6.24 Comparison between the water level changes due to the atmospheric pressure
th
variation from ECMWF and NOAA with the observed residuals considering 6 for the period 10
th
20 October 1987 in the closest point to the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge. ........................... 86
th
Figure 6.25 Isobars and wind field as considered in the storm surge modelling on 15 October
1987 12:00 UTM. ......................................................................................................................... 87
xiii
Figure 6.26 Computed storm surge (with pressure and wind) and the expected inverted
th th
barometer effect surge in the 13 18 October 1987 period. .................................................. 87
Figure 6.27 Computed time series for the astronomical and meteorological forcing: jointly and
added up compared with the observed water surface elevation at the Viana do Castelo tidal
th th
gauge in the period 12 18 October 1987. ............................................................................. 88
th
Figure 7.1 Lima river mudflats, as obtained from Google Earth in 18 July 2010, showing the
complex channel configuration. This image was probably obtained during a low tide when most
of the tidal flats were emerged. ................................................................................................... 90
Figure 7.2 Mesh M_EST used to model the Lima estuary and location of the five considered
reference stations. From West to East: Viana do Castelo tidal gauge as considered in the
chapter 6 (reference station 1), the real location of this tidal gauge (reference station 2) and
points 1, 2 and 3 (reference stations 3, 4 and 5, respectively) as defined in Hidrodata staff
(2006). ......................................................................................................................................... 91
Figure 7.3 Differences between the final bathymetry considered and the interpolated from the
scatter set in the tidal flats area................................................................................................... 93
Figure 7.4 Final bathymetry considered in the model calibration. ............................................ 94
Figure 7.5 Computed Courant number based on the size function considered to build the
estuarine mesh for a time step of 0.5s. ....................................................................................... 95
Figure 7.6 Recorded and modelled velocity module at reference station 3 for different
scenarios. .................................................................................................................................... 97
Figure 7.7 Observed and modelled water surface elevation for reference station 3 (Point 1
th th
Hidrodata staff, 2006) in the period 4 - 18 October 2006. ....................................................... 98
Figure 7.8 Observed and modelled water surface elevation at the Viana do Castelo tidal
th th
gauge in the period 12 - 18 October 1987. ............................................................................. 98
Figure 7.9 Forno da Cal hydrometric station position in the Lima river.................................... 99
th th
Figure 7.10 Forno da Cal approximate hydrograph in the 10 20 October 1987 period. . 100
Figure 7.11 Observed residuals and computed residuals for the two considered domains:
oceanic (M0) and estuarine (M_EST). ...................................................................................... 101
Figure 7.12 Water surface elevations for the 5 model reference stations and comparison with
observed residuals in the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge. .......................................................... 101
Figure 7.13 Comparison between the observed values, modelled with astronomy and
meteorology for the oceanic domain and modelled with astronomy, meteorology and river flow
for the estuarine domain. ........................................................................................................... 102
th
Figure 7.14 Tidal flats water surface elevations and velocity field at: (a) 14 October 1987
th th th
00:00 UTM, (b) 15 October 1987 00:00 UTM, (c) 15 October 1987 00:00 UTM, (d) 15
th th
October 1987 12:00 UTM, (e) 15 October 1987 18:00 UTM, (f) 16 October 1987 00:00 UTM,
th th
(g) 17 October 1987 01:00 UTM and (h) 17 October 1987 19:00 UTM. ............................... 103
xiv
List of tables
Table 2.1 Bathymetry data sources ........................................................................................... 6
Table 2.2 Designation and area of the surveyed zones without sufficient information .............. 8
Table 2.3 Extract from the tidal levels table for September 2010 [Source: Portuguese
Hydrographic Institute (Instituto Hidrogrfico)] .............................................................................. 9
Table 2.4 Statistics of the GNSS survey at geodetic and levelling marks ............................... 12
Table 2.5 Statistical analysis for the GNSS surveyed points in the intertidal areas ................ 13
Table 2.6 Orthometric height (H), ellipsoidal height (h), and geoid undulation (N) for the
surveyed points (Falco et al., 2011) .......................................................................................... 15
Table 2.7 Geoidal undulation data ........................................................................................... 16
Table 3.1 Main tidal constituents possible to consider in the ADCIRC model from the Le
Provost database. Adapted from [7] ............................................................................................ 21
Table 3.2 Long period tidal constituents (Defant, 1961 and [7]) .............................................. 21
Table 4.1 Friction formulations and associated expressions (adapted from Rebordo and
Trigo-Teixeira, 2009) ................................................................................................................... 48
Table 5.1 Statistical analysis of the comparison between sea level atmospheric pressure from
NOAA and ECMWF for the years 1987 and 1991 ...................................................................... 54
Table 5.2 Different statistical parameters for different Signal to Noise-power Ratio (SNR) .... 56
Table 5.3 Tidal constituents amplitude and phase obtained with T-tide analysis for years 1987
and 1999 and from the IH tide table ............................................................................................ 57
Table 6.1 Project coordinates used during the modelling sequence ....................................... 59
Table 6.2 Model input parameters for the SCN_0 scenario ..................................................... 62
Table 6.3 Statistical analysis for the SCN_0 scenario ............................................................. 63
Table 6.4 Different scenarios considered ................................................................................. 64
Table 6.5 Statistical analysis for different friction values coefficients ...................................... 65
Table 6.6 Scenarios considered in the wave continuity parameter calibration ........................ 66
Table 6.7 Statistical analysis for different wave continuity coefficients .................................... 67
Table 6.8 Scenarios considered in the lateral viscosity parameter calibration ........................ 68
Table 6.9 Statistical analysis for different lateral viscosity coefficients .................................... 69
Table 6.10 Statistical analysis for different mainland boundary condition types ...................... 69
Table 6.11 Comparison of the initial and final calibration statistical parameters ..................... 72
Table 6.12 Statistical indicators comparing the M0 and M0R mesh model output .................. 73
Table 6.13 Amplitude and phase of the main astronomical constituents at Viana do Castelo
from different sources .................................................................................................................. 75
Table 6.14 Amplitude and phase differences between modelled and observed/ published for
the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge ................................................................................................ 75
Table 6.15 Maximum and minimum amplitude and phase differences between modelled and
published values for the other seven tidal gauges ...................................................................... 75
Table 6.16 Amplitude and phase of the main astronomical constituents at Viana do Castelo
from different sources .................................................................................................................. 76
xv
Table 6.17 Analysis of the importance of considering the Coriolis parameter as variable for
Leixes tidal gauge ..................................................................................................................... 77
Aveiro tidal gauge ........................................................................................................................ 77
Figueira da Foz tidal gauge ......................................................................................................... 77
Peniche tidal gauge ..................................................................................................................... 77
Cascais tidal gauge ..................................................................................................................... 78
Sines tidal gauge ......................................................................................................................... 78
Lagos tidal gauge ........................................................................................................................ 78
Table 6.24 Statistical analysis of the differences between model and observations both using
6 and 13 tidal constituents. .......................................................................................................... 80
Table 6.25 Generated mesh data............................................................................................. 82
Table 6.26 Statistical analysis for different meshes and same model parameters .................. 84
Table 7.1 Coordinates of the three control points used for the model calibration .................... 92
Table 7.2 Wetting/drying default options .................................................................................. 92
Table 7.3 Model input parameters for the Lima estuary used during the calibration ............... 94
Table 7.4 Overview of the parameters considered in the initial scenario (SCN_0_EST) ........ 96
Table 7.5 Values of the parameters considered in each of the calibration scenarios.............. 97
Table 7.6 Statistical analysis for the water surface level at reference station 3 ...................... 97
th th
Table 7.7 Mean daily flow for the Forno da Cal hydrometric station in the 10 20 October
1987 period................................................................................................................................ 100
xvi
List of Abbreviations
ADCIRC Advanced Circulation model
CD Chart Datum
CS Contour Spacing
DTLXMIL Lisbon Militar Cartographic Datum (Datum Lisboa Militar)
DTM Digital Terrain Model
DT73 Datum 73
ECMWF European Centre for Medium-range Weather Forecast
EU European Union
FDM Finite Difference Method
FEM Finite Element Method
GFE Galerkin Finite Elements
GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System
GPS Global Positioning System
GWCE Generalized Wave Continuity Equation
SHG Hayford-Gauss Cartographic projection
HAT Highest Astronomical Tide
IGEOE Instituto Geogrfico do Exrcito
IGP Instituto Geogrfico Portugus
IH Instituto Hidrogrfico (Portuguese Hydrographic Institute)
LAT Lowest Astronomical Tide
LIDAR Light Detection And Ranging
LGUM Local Geoidal Undulation Model
LNEC Laboratrio Nacional de Engenharia Civil
LTEA Local Truncation Error Analysis
MHWN Mean High Water Neaps
MHWS Mean High Water Springs
MLWN Mean Low Water Neaps
MLWS Mean Low Water Springs
MSL Mean Sea Level
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RMSE Root Mean Square Error
SLR Sea Level Rise
SNR Signal to Noise-power Ratio
SMS Surface-water Modelling System
SPD Scalar Paving Density
USA United States of America
WSE Water surface elevation
2DDI 2D Depth Integrated
xvii
List of Symbols
Latin
Ai Amplitude of the harmonic constituent i [L]
Cd Wind drag coefficient [-]
Cf Friction coefficient
Cjn Constant characterizing the amplitude of tidal constituent n of species j
CN Courant number [-]
2
dp Small pressure difference [M/T L]
-1
Coriolis parameter [T ]
fjn Time-dependent nodal factor
2
g Gravitational acceleration [L /T]
h Ellipsoidal height [L] (chapter 2)
h Bathymetric depth [L] (all chapters except 2)
h (P) Ellipsoidal height of point P [L]
hA, hB Water column depth at point A and B, respectively [L]
H Orthometric height [L] (chapter 2)
H = + h Water column depth [L] (all chapters except 2)
H (P) Orthometric height of point P [L]
j= 0, 1, 2 tidal species, respectively declinational, diurnal and semidiurnal
M, P Hayford-Gauss Militar Datum coordinates [L]
N Geoidal undulation [L]
N (P) Geoidal undulation at point P [L]
2
PA, PB Atmospheric pressure at point A and B, respectively [M/T L]
2
Ps Atmospheric pressure at the sea surface [M/T L]
R Earth radius [L]
T Wave period [T]
Ti Period of the harmonic constituent i [T]
Tjn Period of constituent n of species j [T]
t Time [T]
t0 Reference time [T]
U - Depth-averaged horizontal velocity in u direction [L/T]
V Depth-averaged horizontal velocity in v direction [L/T]
vjn Time-dependent astronomical argument
W10 Wind velocity 10 m above the water level [L/T].
zmodelled, i value of the modelled generic variable zi
zmeasured, i value of the measured generic variable zi
xviii
Greek
Earth elasticity factor
2
Pressure difference between two points [M/T L]
Time step [T]
Mesh element size [L]
Difference in free surface elevation between two points [L]
Latitude, positive North of Equator (degrees)
- Phase of the harmonic constituent i (degrees)
Longitude, positive East of Greenwich (degrees) (chapter 4 excluding section 4.1.3.2);
Wave length (4.1.3.2) [L]
Newtonian equilibrium tidal potential [L]
Angular velocity of the harmonic constituent i

-5
Angular speed of the Earth (7.2921159 10 rad/s)
0 Reference density [M/L ]

3
air Density of air (1.25 kg/ m )

3
2
Combination of bottom stresses and imposed surface stresses [M/T L]
Integration constant designated as Wave continuity factor
bx, by Bottom stresses in x and y directions, respectively [M/T L]

2
sx, sy Imposed surface stresses in x and y direction, respectively [M/T L]

2
2
Wind shear stress [M/T L]
2
Wind shear stress in the x direction [M/T L]
Friction term, defined based on the chosen formulation, linear, quadratic or hybrid
Free surface elevation [L]
xix
xx
1 Introduction
1.1 Problem definition
Floods in coastal and estuarine areas are mainly caused by the sea level rise due to strong
winds, significant pressure drops and the frequently associated precipitation. The effects of
these factors can be strongly enhanced in case the storm hits the coast in a period with high
water levels. Significant material damages and human losses may happen due to these
phenomena.
Even though along the Portuguese coast these events are not as extreme and critical as in
other places, due to their frequency and associated damages and losses, it is considered of
great importance to model and forecast the impact of such events. Nonetheless, during storm
surge events, the sea level rise may cause flow rate changes of the sewage systems, which are
more severe than the design scenarios, usually considering only the maximum astronomic tide
(MAT) instead of the maximum sea surface elevation, which can be set as a linear combination
of the mean high water and a storm surge height with a set recurrence period.
Knowledge of the character of such events allows a significant reduction in losses and damages
in case extreme storms hit the coast. The recurrence interval can be increased and the impact
of such events mitigated if preventive measures are taken. Furthermore, the risk might be
assessed before damage occurs to coastal and estuarines structures and lives are lost.
The European Union (EU) directive 2007/60/CE concerning the assessment and risk
management of floods states that each member of the EU must assess the flooding risk level,
create risk charts and take adequate measures in order to mitigate the risk wherever needed.
This directive, also known as EU Flood Directive, considers for the first time three assessment
stages: flooding risk assessment, flooding risk charts and flooding risk management. This
directive considers explicitly coastal and estuarine areas.
To accomplish this purpose a description of the phenomena and corresponding modelling

should be performed. Estuaries and lagoons areas should be carefully studied since these
areas have a strong hydrodynamic interaction between the ocean and the river system as well
as a significant human presence. The combination of these factors is likely to be more important
than each alone.
A detailed study as presented in this dissertation is justified since there is little knowledge about
the impact of storm surges in estuaries and lagoons in Portugal. In view of the fact that few tidal
gauges are present and limited data available from existing ones are two more reasons why this
detailed study is justified. This data is needed in order to perform flood frequency assessment
studies and create risk charts.
This phenomenon is well studied for river systems upstream of the tidal influence but is less
known in estuaries and lagoons with significant tidal influence. For the Lima river, which has an
estuary where mesotidal amplitudes are observed, the focus will be in the zone where the storm
surge impacts are expected to be more severe. Figure 1.1 shows a picture of this estuary and
one of the GNSS devices used during the survey
1
Figure 1.1 Lima estuary and Viana do Castelo as seen from the South bank during the survey
(taken in September 2010).
1.2 Goals and methodology

In this dissertation the identification of several extreme events with storm surges is necessary in
order to guide the modelling of the phenomena for the significant periods and define recurrence
periods. The main goal in the present dissertation is setting a model which might be used to
model storm surge for the Lima estuary and, if adequate, to other places in the Portuguese
coastline and Galicia (Spain). Secondary goals are assessing the modelling possibilities,
limitations and factors to be considered while attempting to reproduce the real processes and
phenomena.
The present dissertation considered the following initial steps: a survey to create a Local Geoid
Undulation Model (LGUM) and a Digital Terrain Model for the Lima estuary, literature review
about storm surge phenomena and modelling strategies, definition of the information necessary
for the model setup in ADCIRC, (Luettich et al., 1992) including identifying and comparing data
from different sources, and analysis of the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge record, using the
T_TIDE software package (Pawlowicz et al., 2002), to extract the astronomic component and
the corresponding residuals.
After these steps the model setup is defined consisting of setting both the domain and initial
parameters. The model is then calibrated for the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge using astronomic
forcing and by changing some parameters. For the best calibration scenario the model is
validated with respect to different tidal gauges. Once the model is validated the interaction
between astronomy and meteorology (linear or non linear) is assessed and the model skill in
reproducing the surge evaluated. Lastly, the domain is adapted to consider the Lima estuary,
recalibrated, the storm surge event simulated and the results analysed.
2
1.3 Structure
The present dissertation was divided into 8 core chapters. In chapter 2 an elevation model for
the Lima estuary is created. This is done by coupling altimetry and bathymetry information from
different sources. The sources comprise of both existing data and information obtained from a
survey conducted in September 2010. The information obtained from the survey was processed
and, after a LGUM created for the Viana do Castelo area and a DTM for the Lima estuary. It
should be noted that, even though the resulting output from this chapter is used only in chapter
7, it was chosen to present it herein since it has a strong scientific background not directly
related to the numerical modelling process that is the central part of the present dissertation.
In chapter 3 the existing literature is reviewed. The basic concepts such as tides, storm surge,
and sea level are briefly addressed. After an analysis of the storm surge phenomena along the
Portuguese coast, the state of the art of storm surge modelling is described. Finally the
modelling efforts along the Portuguese coast are analysed and some essential modelling
concepts are mentioned.
In chapter 4 the model used in the present dissertation is described. The basic equations
considered in the ADCIRC source code are referred as well as the model setup parameters.
This model setup comprises of the different steps to be taken and how they might influence the
obtained results.
In chapters 5 through 7 the modelling work performed for this dissertation is presented. In
chapter 5 the atmospheric pressure data obtained from different sources are analysed. This is
needed to compute the inverted barometer effect and as a part of the meteorological forcing.
These data are obtained from NOAA, ECMWF and IH. In this chapter, the Viana do Castelo
tidal gauge record is analysed using the T_TIDE software package. The recorded time series by
the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge is decomposed in two different parts: the astronomical time
series and the residuals. In the last part the time series stationarity is briefly discussed.
In chapter 6 the ADCIRC model setup, which is used in the calibration process, is described in
detail. The initial scenario is consecutively adapted by defining other values for the parameters
th th
and different boundary conditions. The 14 -16 October 1987 storm is also modelled herein
using the values obtained during the calibration process comprising both atmospheric pressure
and wind data.
In chapter 7 the last part of the present dissertation is presented. This chapter emerge as a
sequence of chapter 2 where the detailed DTM is defined till inside the estuary. A smaller
domain is defined in order to first assess and calibrate the flow circulation in the estuary. The
calibration considers observed water levels and velocity field measurements at three points.
The validation of this model is done, with respect to the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge, and the
th th
river flow considered in the period 12 - 18 October 1987. In the last chapter, final
considerations, future developments and recommendations are mentioned.
3
2 An elevation model for the Lima estuary
2.1 Introduction
To model natural processes which occur in coastal or estuarine areas it is necessary to have an
elevation model capable of reproducing the morphological characteristics which are inherent to
the domain. Considering the fact bathymetry and altimetry datasets are referred to different
vertical data and coordinate systems, normalization is required. With respect to the existing
vertical reference levels, the mean sea level (MSL) is defined based on the Cascais tidal gauge
records and serves as the altimetry vertical datum, whereas the chart datum (CD) is the vertical
datum for the bathymetry. The different vertical data are presented in figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1 Schematic representation of the different tidal and reference levels (adapted from [2]).
Analysing the existing datasets and representing them in the same coordinate system it was
possible to notice some areas with little or even no elevation information. These areas are
mostly located inside the estuary in intertidal areas, which, as the name suggests, are places
where wetting and drying occurs during the tidal cycle. Intertidal areas are difficult to survey with
the traditional methods for bathymetry and altimetry since these strongly rely on the tidal cycle
phase and corresponding water surface elevation.
To solve this situation and in order to assess the quality of the existing elevation data a GNSS
device was used to acquire additional information. Due to the fact GNSS heights are relative to
the WGS84 ellipsoid, elevations measured with GNSS devices must be converted to
orthometric heights which are relative to the mean sea level. This conversion can be made
using a local geoidal undulation model (Featherstone et al., 1998).
The existing information and the surveyed data are normalized, with respect to the same datum,
in order to generate the final digital terrain model (DTM) for the Lima estuary. The DTM was
4
obtained by kriging techniques (Falco, 2010) and resampled based on a regular mesh with 50
m spacing. This process is detailed further in the following sections.
For the setup of the hydrodynamic model, an elevation model, with the ability to represent the
bathymetry and the topography of the area of interest, is needed. Considering the importance of
this model, the construction process is described in relative detail. Figure 2.2 shows a military
topographic map for the Viana do Castelo area.
Figure 2.2 Topographic map of Viana do Castelo scale 1:25000 from IGEOE.
When setting up the hydrodynamic numerical model for a coastal engineering project, a
combination of height and bathymetric data should be considered. Considering the possibility of
obsolescent data, the existence of gaps, the diversity of sources, different acquisition dates as
well as techniques and reference systems the direct application as a DTM is not possible. To
allow the correct and adequate creation of a DTM it is necessary to combine all the available
data in one single model with the desired coordinate system (Casaca and Falco, 2008; Falco
et al., 2011).
2.2 Existing altimetry and bathymetry data for the studied area
The Lima River studied area comprises a part of the Lima estuary of approximately 10000 m by
500 m. The existing bathymetry and height datasets were obtained, for this area and prior to
this work, from different sources, periods and using different methods.
The altimetry dataset was obtained from the topographic map at scale 1/10000 created by the
Portuguese Army Geographical Institute (IGEOE). This dataset was acquired in 1997 and
represented in the Hayford-Gauss coordinate system Datum Lisboa Militar (SHGDDTLXMIL)
with a contour spacing (CS) of 10 m.
5
The bathymetry datasets can be subdivided into three regions: Lima, Eiffel and Estuary. These
were collected by the Hidrodata company and represented in the HGSDTLXMIL cartographic
system. The Lima river dataset was collected in 2006 with a spatial resolution of approximately
20 m by 10 m. The Eiffel dataset was collected in the vicinity of the Eiffel bridge in 2006 with a
spatial resolution of approximately 2 m by 2 m and the dataset named Estuary was collected in
2004 with a spatial resolution of approximately 5 m by 5 m. These resolutions, even though not
exact, are mentioned here to provide an idea of the relative densities. A summary is presented
in table 2.1 and their location in figure 2.9.
Besides the bathymetry and altimetry data some useful information contained in ortophotomaps
for the Lima river represented in the HGSDTLXMIL were used. These ortophotomaps are
presented in figure 2.3 and show an aerial view of Viana do Castelo and the Lima estuary.
Table 2.1 Bathymetry data sources
Data name Source Year Coordinate system Number of points Spatial resolution
Lima HIDRODATA 2006 SHGDTLXMIL 65535 20m x 10m
Eiffel HIDRODATA 2006 SHGDTLXMIL 5120 2m x 2m
Estuary HIDRODATA 2004 SHGDTLXMIL 99399 5m x 5m
Figure 2.3 Ortophotomaps for Viana do Castelo, Lima estuary and river Lima.
In light of the different data and altimetry references, it is necessary to normalize all data to one
vertical datum as well as a uniform coordinate system.
The altimetry zero for the orthometric heights is set the same as the default altimetry zero and
the referential is coincident with the CD. The altimetry zero is coincident with the MSL and the
CD is set as the lowest astronomical tide in the period 1882-1938. For mainland Portugal these
levels are set based in the recorded data from the Cascais tidal gauge (Casaca et al., 2005)
6
and the CD is set as 2.00 m below the altimetric zero. Bathymetric data are relative to the CD
for the Viana do Castelo harbour as referred in the Portuguese Hydrographic Institute (IH) tide
tables.
2.2.1 Coordinate systems description
The aforementioned Hayford-Gauss system uses the Gauss-Krger projection to project the
Hayford ellipsoid placed at the S. Jorge castle astronomical observatory in Lisbon. The central
point of this system has latitude 39 40 N and longitude 8 07 54.862 W relatively to the
Hayford-Lisboa Datum. The Hayford-Gauss Militar system (SHGM) is defined from the Hayford
Gauss system by adding 200 km to the M coordinate and 300 km to the P coordinate. This is
done with the purpose of assuring positive values for the coordinates in Mainland Portugal
(Casaca et al., 2005).
Since in this project WGS84 ellipsoidal coordinates were considered, it was necessary to
convert the SHGDTLXMIL dataset to this coordinate system. There are several methodologies
for the transformation of coordinates between different systems. For the purpose of this project
the harmonization was made using the Bursa-Wolf transformation. This transformation allows
the use of 7 parameters, which is advantageous when compared with the Molodensky
transformation allowing only 5 parameters (Casaca et al., 2005).
The coordinate system was first converted to the Hayford-Gauss Datum Lisboa (SHGDTLX), as
it was used in the bathymetry datasets. The remaining information was matched through Bursa-
Wolf transforms using the IGPs published parameters. The CD was chosen as the reference
level.
2.2.2 Available data analysis
After the aforementioned process for the normalization of the different data, areas with
insufficient information or no information at all were defined. These zones were identified and
are represented in figure 2.4 by polygons. In table 2.2 the area of the polygons lacking or
without information is presented. This analysis is of the greatest importance since a
measurement campaign was to be prepared and planning was needed.
7
Figure 2.4 Polygons representing areas without or with insufficient elevation data. Points with
known elevation are represented in yellow.
Table 2.2 Designation and area of the surveyed zones without sufficient information
Name Area (m2) Area (ha)
0 69055 6.906
14 523128 52.313
15 25388 2.539
16 35617 3.562
17 261852 26.185
Total 2324654 232.465
2.3 Data collection
2.3.1 General aspects
Considering the relevance of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to the present dissertation,
a brief introduction is provided in this section. Due to the extensive research conducted by
Falco (2010) this chapter strongly relies on that work. Nonetheless, wherever other relevant
sources exist, they are cited accordingly.
The Global Positioning System (GPS) developed by the USA Department of Defence is among
the most widely used geodetic spatial systems. GNSS spatial systems are affected by many
error sources. These errors can be divided in three groups according to their source: satellite,
atmospheric and receptor errors. The satellite error type is due to ephemerides of satellites and
clocks. The atmospheric error is due to the effect of the Ionosphere and Troposphere on the
speed of light which changes the travel time of the signal. The receptor error is mostly due to its
clock error as well as lack of antenna calibration. Further information related to GNSS is
available in Falco (2010) and Casaca et al. (2005).
8
2.3.2 Survey preparation
After the areas without information had been identified, a survey was conducted in order to
improve the data in areas where the existing was not considered sufficient. Another purpose of
this campaign was obtaining data to define a LGUM.
th th
This survey was conducted in the period 8 - 10 September 2010 in cooperation with the
Concrete Dams Department, Applied Geodesy Division (LNEC). The survey period was
selected in such a way that spring tides were expected. This was chosen for the reason that
higher amplitudes are observed during this part of the tidal cycle. This is justified since a wider
area can be surveyed with the used method pedestrian campaign. Otherwise, in the period
between mean low water level and spring low water level, as well as in intertidal areas, it would
not have been possible to acquire data during this survey.
In table 2.3 the predicted astronomical tidal levels for September 2010 in Viana do Castelo are
presented. The complete extract is presented in appendix A.
Table 2.3 Extract from the tidal levels table for September 2010 [Source: Portuguese
Hydrographic Institute (Instituto Hidrogrfico)]
A Leica GNSS receptor (GS20) was used to acquire elevation data during the survey campaign.
It was decided to acquire information uniformly, for as many points as possible, so that data are
not focused only on a small parcel of the surveyed area. Considering precision and the chosen
methodology, it was decided to collect information in each point for 6 minutes corresponding to
360 recorded positions with an interval of 1 second. This duration was chosen in order to
achieve a reasonable precision with the post processing.
For the construction of the geoid undulation model sampling of points with known ellipsoidal
height and orthometric height is needed. Considering the previous knowledge of the orthometric
height for all sample points, it was necessary to use GNSS equipment to acquire ellipsoidal
heights. Geodesic marks, which are the national standard and have known orthometric and
ellipsoidal heights, were used as control points. A further density increase is achieved placing
the GPS receiver at levelling marks. This procedure was chosen considering the very small
number of geodesic marks and the available number of levelling marks. The location and spatial
distribution of these benchmarks must be identified beforehand.
9
A previous identification of the location of these marks and their spatial distribution was
therefore made and the visited marks are represented in figure 2.5.
Figure 2.5 Visited geodetic (red) and levelling marks (yellow) (Google Earth).
Given the need to create a local geoid undulation model, a certain number of benchmarks for
which the orthometric height is known with good precision geodetic and levelling - are used to
place GNSS equipment. A Choke Ring Topcon CR3_GGD antenna was used and placed for
one hour with a recording interval of 5 seconds in each levelling mark and geodesic mark. In
figures 2.6, 2.7 and 2.8 the GNSS receptors used during the survey are presented.
Figure 2.6 Survey equipment used for the acquisition of position and altimetry data.
2.3.3 Survey results
During the survey it was only possible to acquire additional information for some of the
indentified areas. Among several reasons this was due to the large area which required
10
surveying and the limited equipment and human resources as well as time constraints due to
tidal rise and daylight duration.
Figure 2.7 Example of a triangulation mark Figure 2.8 Example of a benchmark (MN27)
(Roques) with the antenna and the recording with the antenna and the recording equipment.
equipment.
Nonetheless, the acquired data was considered to be satisfactory since it allowed an

improvement of the existing digital terrain model. Additionally it served to assess the efficiency
of the GNSS survey method for future projects.
The GNSS receptors were placed in situ and position and altimetry information gathered. After
the survey the obtained position records were subjected to post-processing using the
permanent stations Paredes de Coura, Cascais and Faro de Anha.
After the survey was performed the acquired dataset was post processed. The major advantage
of this post-processing is the increase in the precision of the measured data, achieved by
minimization of deterministic errors. The raw data has a low accuracy due to several error
sources. Among these sources of errors it should be noted the satellites (clock and satellite
ephemerides), atmosphere (Ionosphere and troposphere) and the receptors (clock errors and
antenna calibration parameters) errors which usually lead to significant differences between the
recorded and the real coordinates of a certain place. With post processing methodology it is
possible to minimize the clock differences and the atmospheric errors.
These effects were minimized by considering a benchmark with known positions which will be
used to compute the signal travel time from each satellite to the receiver. This time was then
compared with the registered time and the difference applied to other measurements in order to
11
correct the aforementioned errors. It should be mentioned that multipath errors are not
accounted for in this method (Hurn, 1993).
It is a fact that errors are more significant in the absolute mode than after the differential
correction. Considering this, the differential correction procedure was followed. Another
procedure to reduce these errors is using double frequency receivers which allow solving some
of the ambiguities more accurately.
The satellite ephemerides were obtained from the IGEO website [3] for the permanent stations
Cascais (300 km) and Paredes de Coura (50 km). These stations were used during the post
processing procedure. Given the proximity to the study area data of the Faro de Anha geodetic
mark this was used as a permanent station to compare the results with the Cascais and
Paredes de Coura national permanent stations. For this procedure several aspects have to be
taken into account among which the information concerning the offset of the Antennas and its
height.
After the datasets obtained in geodetic and levelling marks were post-processed, the results
obtained, from the performed statistical analysis, are presented in table 2.4. It should be
mentioned an average quality of 2.3 cm in horizontal, 1.8 cm in vertical measures and a
combined measure accuracy of 2.9 cm.
Table 2.4 Statistics of the GNSS survey at geodetic and levelling marks
Position Quality Height quality Combined height and position quality
Maximum difference (cm) 7.5 6.8 9.6
Minimum difference (cm) 0.1 0.1 0.1
Mean (cm) 2.3 1.8 2.9
Standard deviation (cm) 1.4 1.2 1.8
Amplitude (cm) 7.4 6.7 9.5
Regarding the surveyed points in the areas lacking information, Leica GeoOffice software [4]
was used for the post processing. This software allows the differential correction of the
surveyed data considering several parameters such as the IGEO satellite position and the
equipment parameters not considered while the data were being recorded. Since the obtained
coordinates were already WGS84 no coordinates transformation had to be performed. In figure
2.9 the planimetric position of the surveyed points is presented in pink.
The same methodology was also applied to the data collected on intertidal areas and the
statistical values are presented in table 2.5.
12
Figure 2.9 Planimetric position of the surveyed points (represented in pink).
Table 2.5 Statistical analysis for the GNSS surveyed points in the intertidal areas
Position Quality Height Quality Position +Height
Maximum (cm) 14.4 14.8 20.7
Minimum (cm) 0.1 0.1 0.1
Mean (cm) 2.5 2.1 03.3
Amplitude (cm) 14.4 14.7 20.5
2.3.4 Local geoidal undulation model
First the geoid is defined as the equipotential surface of the Earths gravity field, which would be
coincident with the mean sea level surface if the Earth was all covered with water, and is only
dependent on the Earths gravitational field (Hooijber, 2008).
For most applications this surface is materialized by the MSL in the oceans and connected seas
and extended inland where it is not possible to define a MSL. The extension of this surface must
attend to the mean gravitational field which is the physical parameter responsible for the
definition of the geoid. The gravitational field can be determined by measuring it directly or by
interpolation between points where it is already known.
13
In view of the fact that heights considered in Portugal are orthometric heights H - and the use
of a GNSS receptor in surveys considers ellipsoidal heights h - it is necessary to convert
them. For this purpose the geoidal undulation N must be known.
The orthometric height of a point [H(P)] is defined as the difference between the geoid elevation
and the place where the point is located. In Portugal, the orthometric heights are determined
based in the Helmert model for the determination of the mean gravity field which will be used in
the geoid definition.
The ellipsoidal height of a point [h(P)] is defined as the difference between the height of the
ellipsoid and the point where the coordinates were measured. The geoid undulation of a point P
(N(P)) can be defined as the difference between the ellipsoidal height and the orthometric
height of that point. Once H(P) and N(P) are known expression (2.1) can be used to compute
the orthometric height. (Falco, 2010; Featherstone et al., 1998; Fotopoulos, 2005).
(2.1)
The geoid undulation can be defined by global (e.g. EGM08), regional (e.g. GeoidPT08) or local
models depending on the size of the geographic area in question and the project scope and
requirements. Geoid models also vary widely in the techniques and the amount of information
required for construction.
Considering the relatively small area and the desired precision, a local geoid undulation model
has been selected. This decision was also made considering the academic exercise of
assessing the significance of the differences between a regional and a local geoidal model.
After the information was collected in the geodesic marks and levelling marks it was used to
create the local geoid undulation model for the Viana do Castelo area.
This procedure consists of two different stages. Firstly the geoid undulation corresponding to
the difference between the ellipsoidal height (measured with GPS) and the orthometric height
(provided by IGP), is determined for the entire sample. With this data, which should be
homogeneously distributed throughout the study area, the values and the differences between
them were estimated using a bilinear polygonal trend. This is done to obtain the value of the
geoid undulation throughout the study area. Later on, the local geoid model was obtained by
applying kriging techniques to those values (Falco, 2010).
In table 2.6 the geoidal undulation values as well as the orthometric and ellipsoidal heights can
be observed. Considering the previous methodology, the local geoid undulation model was
determined and presented in figure 2.10.
For mainland Portugal the existing geoid model is designated by GeoidPT08 and it can be
downloaded from the IGP website. This geoid model was made for the whole Iberian Peninsula.
This model referred to the GRS80 ellipsoid has the geoid undulation values defined in a 1.5 by
1.5 grid [5].
14
Table 2.6 Orthometric height (H), ellipsoidal height (h), and geoid undulation (N) for the surveyed
points (Falco et al., 2011)
Point name Type H (m) h (m) N (m)
Faro de Anha Triangulation mark 214.63 269.64 55.01
Roques Triangulation mark 309.37 364.41 55.04
S. Silvestre Triangulation mark 339.84 394.88 55.04
NP01 Benchmark 66.26 121.32 55.06
NP04 Benchmark 66.92 121.99 55.07
NP05 Benchmark 65.67 120.75 55.08
NP19 Benchmark 89.41 144.41 55.00
NP27 Benchmark 70.99 126.04 55.05
NP21A Benchmark 110.09 165.09 55.00
Seminrio Benchmark 60.74 115.77 55.03
Figure 2.10 Local geoid undulation model for Viana do Castelo area (Falco et al., 2011).
The local geoid model is compared with a regional geoid undulation model and the results
presented in table 2.7. The creation of a Local Geoidal Undulation Model (LGUM) is justified
since it provides a much better precision on the final results. This is stated considering the
underlying methodology and the data spacing.
15
Table 2.7 Geoidal undulation data
Name h (m) H(m) N Measured (m) N GEOIDPT08 (m) Differences (m)
Faro de Anha 214.637 159.790 54.847 55.013 -0.166
NP01 66.264 11.106 55.158 55.058 0.100
NP04 66.929 11.685 55.244 55.074 0.170
NP05 65.676 10.469 55.207 55.076 0.131
NP19 89.412 34.303 55.109 55.004 0.105
NP27 70.991 15.822 55.169 55.054 0.115
NP21A 110.090 54.971 55.119 55.007 0.112
Roques 309.372 254.410 54.962 55.043 -0.081
Seminrio 60.744 6.466 54.278 55.028 -0.750
S. Silvestre 339.844 284.820 55.024 55.040 -0.016
2.4 Creation of the combined digital terrain model (DTM)

In this section the elevation model of the terrain is created. For this purpose the information
acquired during the survey and the formerly existing data have to be coupled. This coupling will
imply the transformation of the different coordinates systems to only one for all the available
datasets.
The coupling method implied the following stages:
Transformation of the different data sources to the same coordinates system;

Application of kriging techniques to build a DTM;
Definition of a grid spacing value;
Extracting the altimetric data for the chosen grid spacing.
After the described survey was performed and the DTM created, several aspects should be
mentioned. Considering the dimension of the remaining areas with insufficient elevation data, it
was concluded that the methodology chosen only allows a small volume of information since it
requires at least 360 positions and 5 to 10 minutes per point to assure data accuracy (Lima et
al., 2007). Considering the purpose of the survey it should be mentioned that a larger number of
points with a smaller precision would be probably more adequate for a more realistic
reproduction of the terrain morphology.
The final DTM was resampled in a regular grid of 50 m by 50 m and is presented in figure 2.11.
This is done such that the more important channels are considered and the larger bathymetry
features. It should be mentioned that a finer grid can be chosen to consider smaller scale
bathymetry elements if needed.
16
Figure 2.11 Combined bathymetric elevation model.
2.5 Final notes

Among several different options, which could have been adopted to collect data in intertidal
areas, the reduction of the time in each point might prove to be the most likely to provide
satisfactory results. This reduction should be done carefully and according to the desired
precision more significant where the morphodynamics imply larger natural bottom variability.
Also, the use of more receptors could prove to be a good solution without sacrificing the
accuracy.
Completely different methods that might prove also adequate for a survey of this kind are
classic techniques and air photogrametry methods and LIDAR. The first options might have
costs on the same order of magnitude of the one considered. The costs of the second solution
might be one to two orders of magnitude larger than the used methodology but if inserted in a
multidisciplinary project it might constitute a reasonable option.
As another final note and considering the character of the environmental surrounding river
estuary and intertidal beach band it should be mentioned that natural variability can be
expected on the same order of magnitude as the data precision. Considering the existence of
two dams in the Lima river Alto Lindoso and Touvedo the river flow does not show variability
over the year as high as if the peak flow was not controlled. Thus major changes in the
bathymetry might be only expected in places where dredging operations occur. This, allied with
periodic dredging operations, can lead to variability in the bathymetry of the estuary
In the open coast beach South of the Limas mouth, the difference between summer and winter
profiles can show variability from few centimetres to several decimetres. These oscillations are
17
on the same order of magnitude or greater than the GPS survey precision. Considering the
surveyed period it can be expected that the beach profile had a more pronounced slope,
corresponding to a summer profile. These effects can be taken into account while modelling by
setting a desired number of scenarios. For instance, each corresponding to different bottom
configurations recorded before and after a storm to assess its impact on the obtained results.
Figure 2.12 shows qualitatively how significantly the profile might change over the year and how
this change might be important in the intertidal band.
Figure 2.12 Summer and winter general profiles [6].
Even though the effect of these phenomena might not be very significant while modelling the
estuary itself, the model land boundaries might be affected due to these phenomena.
Additionally, the expected uncertainties in the position of a GPS survey are smaller than the
natural variability of the beach intertidal areas. This fact must be accounted for when surveying
beaches and places where strong wave impact and variability is expected to occur. This might
be done by clearly identifying the survey objectives. Considering these, the survey time frame
can be chosen accordingly. Future developments might allow the inclusion of LIDAR data
obtained during an IGP project to acquire information for the whole Portuguese coast (Falco,
2010).
18
3 Literature review
3.1 Introduction
In this chapter the most important theoretical background that serves as support for the
understanding of the physical phenomena studied and the planning of the modelling process is
presented. The order of the following chapters was defined in such a way that more general
information is given firstly and then more specific information concerning modelling follows.
Astronomic tide, storm surge, mean and expected sea level, wind set-up and inverted
barometer effect concepts are briefly defined. After that, the storm surge phenomenon for the
Portuguese coast, concerning the occurrence and previous modelling efforts, is addressed.
Following this some worldwide storm surge experience is referred and modelling concepts are
briefly explained. Considering that the final modelling part of the present dissertation includes
intertidal areas, which are areas between the high and low water level for a certain period,
inside the domain, wetting and drying of elements occur and some theoretical background is
presented herein.
Bearing in mind the scope of the present dissertation, in which no intention to reproduce or
create a text book exists, when more detailed information is intended the cited references shall
prove to be adequate.
3.2 General concepts
3.2.1 Sea level
The sea level can be defined as the elevation of the sea water surface in respect to a certain
reference mark. Based on this mark and from measures over a sufficiently long period, it is
possible to define the Mean Sea Level (MSL) as the averaged sea level elevation after the non
periodic fluctuations are removed from the time series. An example of such a fluctuation in the
water level record is due to storm surges. Furthermore, MSL can be considered as the sea level
which would be observed in the absence of tides and in calm periods.
The expected sea level can be defined as the water surface elevation which is likely to occur at
a certain time and place. It might be determined based on the MSL and the knowledge of the
tidal harmonic constituents amplitude and phase.
This expected sea level is deterministic and is the result of both the astronomic tide and long
time scale variations of the sea level. The astronomic tide can be determined based upon the
movement of the Sun and the Moon. The other bodies in the universe are not relevant to the
Earth tidal cycles since the combined effect of both the distance and mass gravitational effects
are negligible. The long time scale variations of the mean sea level are the result of climate
changes, strong tectonic events and local subsidence/shoaling.
19
The relative importance of these long time scale variations should be assessed for each place
where a tidal gauge exists and the length of the record justifies it. The magnitude of these
changes should also be carefully evaluated. The analysis of these components shall be
considered while analysing recorded time series
3.2.2 Astronomic tide
The astronomic tide, as the name suggests, is generated by the combined effect of two celestial
bodies - a star (the Sun) and a natural satellite (the Moon) respective gravitational force effect
on the Earths oceans. The oscillation caused by these two bodies fluctuates according to their
relative position. Furthermore, the water body oscillations are also strongly affected by the
presence of land masses and the oceans bottom, which are the major factors for the lack of an
equilibrium tide on Earth.
These tidal oscillations have a periodic deterministic character and so the corresponding sea
level can be predicted provided the coordinates of the location in question are known. This
prediction can be made from the analysis of the tidal constituents for that same place, since
amplitude and phase are a function of the location.
A tidal harmonic constituent can be defined as the water level variation due to a single effect of
the Sun and/or Moon which can be described as a sinusoidal function with an amplitude and
phase. By a linear combination of the aforementioned harmonic constituents for a certain local it
is possible to reproduce the water level for every period of time in that place. In expression (3.1)
the mathematical formulation of this linear combination is presented.
(3.1)
where,
Water surface elevation,
t Time,
Ai - Amplitude of the harmonic constituent i,
i - Angular velocity of the harmonic constituent i, which can be obtained dividing by the
period Ti of that constituent,
i - Phase of the harmonic constituent i.
In table 3.1 the name and character of the tidal constituents available in the Le Provost
database (Le Provost et al., 1994), extracted to the ADCIRC model are presented. In table 3.2
the name and character of the long period tidal constituents are presented.
20
Table 3.1 Main tidal constituents possible to consider in the ADCIRC model from the Le Provost
database. Adapted from [7]
Period
Symbol Designation Description Character
(h)*
Second-order
2N2 Second order constituent 12.9054 Semidiurnal
elliptical lunar
Together with O1 it expresses the effect of the Moon's

declination which accounts for diurnal inequality and, in
K1 Lunisolar 23.9345 Diurnal
extreme, diurnal tides. With P1 it expresses the effects of
the Sun's declination.
Modulates the amplitude and frequency of M2 and S2 for

K2 Lunisolar the declinational effects of the Moon and Sun 11.9672 Semidiurnal
respectively
Together with N2 it modifies the amplitude and

Smaller
L2 frequency of M2 for the effects of variation in the Moon's 12.1916 Semidiurnal
Elliptical Lunar
orbital speed due to its elliptical orbit.
It represents the rotation of the Earth with respect to the

M2 Principal lunar 12.4206 Semidiurnal
Moon.
One of constituents modifying the amplitude and

Variational frequency of M2 for the effects of variation in solar
MU2 12.8718 Semidiurnal
constituent attraction of the Moon resulting in a pear shaped lunar
orbit.
Together with L2 it modifies the amplitude and frequency

Larger
N2 of M2 for the effects of variation in the Moon's orbital 12.6583 Semidiurnal
elliptical Lunar
speed due to its elliptical orbit.
One of the constituents modifying the amplitude and

Larger lunar frequency of M2 for the effects of variation in solar
NU2 12.6260 Diurnal
evectional t attraction of the Moon resulting in a pear shaped lunar
orbit.
O1 Principal lunar It expresses the effect of the Moon's declination 25.8193 Diurnal
P1 Principal solar It expresses the effects of the Sun's declination. 24.0659 Diurnal
Larger With M1 it changes the amplitude and frequency of the

Q1 26.8684 Diurnal
elliptical lunar O1 due to the elliptical orbit of the moon
It represents the rotation of the Earth with respect to the

S2 Principal Solar 12.0000 Semidiurnal
Sun
It modulates the amplitude and frequency of S2 for the

Larger
T2 effects of the variation in the Earth's orbital speed due to 12.0164 Semidiurnal
Elliptical Solar
its elliptical orbit
*Extracted from the Le Provost database via ADCIRC
Table 3.2 Long period tidal constituents (Defant, 1961 and [7])
Symbol Designation Description Period Character

(h)
Mf Lunar Expresses the effect of departure from a sinusoidal 327.86 Long

fortnightly declinational motion of the moon. period
Mm Lunar monthly Expresses the effect of irregularities in the moon's rate 661.30 Long
of change of distance and speed in orbit. period
Ssa Solar semi- Solar annual constituent; together with Ssa, it represents 2191.43 Long
annual the non-uniform changes in Sun's distance and period
declination.
21
The tidal components can be divided into two different groups: the originated from the
movement of both the sun and the moon and the originated by the interaction with the bottom,
which deforms the tidal wave. The tidal constituents presented in table 3.1 belong to the first
type. The second type of harmonic constituents can be defined as higher order harmonics of the
main constituents (such as M4, MS4, etc.) and might appear in very shallow waters (see [10] for
a more detailed explanation).
To model the propagation of the tidal wave, the amplitude and the phase of each of the different
harmonic constituents must be known for a certain number of points each with its own
amplitude and phase. Being the tide a propagating wave, the ocean floor and the land masses
configuration significantly affects the amplitude and the phase of the tidal wave.
3.2.3 Storm surge
There are several processes which might cause variations in the sea level. The most important
among these are storm surges, wave set-up, river flows and other meteorological effects (such
as temperature differences).
A storm surge can be defined as the sea level rise (SLR) in the presence of an intense storm.
This sea level rise is due to the high speed wind set-up and the inverted barometer effect. The
inverted barometer effect is the name given to the variation of the sea level due to variations in
the atmospheric pressure and is further explained in this subsection. The wind waves which are
generated locally can also be considered as an agent contributing to the storm surge. Attending
to the fact the Portuguese wave climate is swell dominated it is considered as a different agent
type.
The wind influence can be explained starting from the shear stress exerted by the moving air
on a water surface, such as the sea surface. This wind shear stress is presented in expression
(3.2).
(3.2)
where,
drag coefficient as a function of the wind speed (Smith and

Blanke, 1975),
3
Density of air (1.25 kg/m ),
Wind velocity 10 m above the water level.
It should be noted that the presented expression was chosen among several analogous
expressions, which exist to explain the variation of the drag coefficient with the wind speed.
Another example can be seen in Kara et al. (2005).
This wind shear stress will cause a water level gradient to balance the forces acting over the
water column. Observing expression (3.2) it is straightforward that the stronger the wind the
higher the shear stress and consequentially the water level gradient. The effect of the water
depth on the set up due to the wind can be described by stating that, since the pressure
distribution over the depth will balance this shear stress and assuming the pressure distribution
22
as hydrostatic, the shallower the control volume is the larger the set up has to be. This helps
explaining partially why in shallower areas the storm surge heights are higher than in deep
waters. Another effect is that the width of the shallow area (e.g. continental shelf), which will be
explained from expression (3.3), strongly affects the surge height. This expression assumes the
wind blowing only in the x-direction.
(3.3)
Summarizing, the effect of the wind is the following:
Considering the wind shear stress and as constant the equilibrium condition
presented in expression (3.3) resumes to a balance between the water column depth
and the water surface gradient.
For a constant wind shear stress (same wind velocity) the shallower an area is the
larger the water surface elevation gradient will be. Thus allowing concluding that, even
considering a larger number of processes, in general, shallower areas have larger water
surface gradients.
Continuing the afore reasoning, assuming an integration scenario over the x-direction
for which the only variable is the x length; and h as constant, the longer the x
integrating line is, the larger the wind set-up will be, hence leading to higher surges.
This analysis, even though much simplified, allows explain why for wide continental shelves the
wind setup effect is larger than for narrow continental shelves.
The other effect, which must also be taken into account, is the atmospheric pressure and it will
be explained based on a small pressure variation (dp). Considering two adjacent prismatic
control volumes in equilibrium, with small dx and dy, and for which the water level gradient can
be assumed as much smaller than the water depth so that the water depth can be assumed to
be the same in each of the control volumes, expression (3.4) can be written.
(3.4)
where,
hA, hB Water column depth at point A and B, respectively,
PA, PB Atmospheric pressure at point A and B, respectively.
Considering expression (3.4) it is possible to write expression (3.5), adapted from Pugh (1987).
where,
Water column depth difference between points A and B,
- Pressure difference between points A and B.
From expression (3.5) it can be straightforward seen that, assuming a sea water density
3 2
1026 kg/m and g=9.80 m/s ,if there is a pressure difference between point A and B and
is in mb, for an increase in the atmospheric pressure of one mb the sea level decreases one
cm.
23
From Pugh (1987), considering the fact usual atmospheric pressures range from 980 mb and
1030 mb and a Standard Atmospheric pressure of 1013 mb, the sea level is expected to range
from MSL to +0.33 cm and -0.17 cm. This effect is often designated as the inverted barometer
effect.
After these considerations, the storm surge height is defined as the difference between the
expected sea level, due to the astronomical effects for a certain moment in time, and the
recorded or forecasted sea level in tidal gauges, considering the presence of wind and pressure
differences relative to MSL pressure. It should be mentioned that the time and spatial scale of
this phenomenon has the same order of magnitude of the generating storm, typically a few
hundred kilometres and one or two days (Holthuijsen, 2007).
It is general knowledge that the most significant contributions for the rise in the sea level during
extreme storms are from wind set-up and inverted barometer effect. Other contributions
mentioned as important to the sea level rise during extreme storm but not included in the storm
surge designation wave-induced set-up and river flows assume greater importance near a
river mouth or a place where the wave set-up can be expected to play a major role. This effect
is mainly driven by the morphology and the estuary area of influence.
It should also be mentioned that the area affected by a stormy sea or flooded during a storm
can be increased by a storm surge. This effect can lead to significant shoreline retreats due to
erosion (dunes), destruction of improperly located buildings, overwashes and flooding (Gama et
al., 1994).
3.3 Time series analysis

The sea level can be recorded by a tidal gauge as a time series. A tidal gauge is an instrument
which measures water levels for a certain interval. These instruments account for natural
phenomena, such as tidal waves and meteorological effects, with periods higher than the
recording interval. The water level is continuously changing whether due to tidal influence, wind,
currents, atmospheric pressure variations or temperature differences. This water level is usually
recorded with a time interval of 60 minutes which allows filtering the higher frequency
oscillations such as waves with smaller periods (e.g. capillary waves, wind waves, swell waves,
bound long waves or seiches). Provided there is sufficient information, a tidal gauge records
periodic oscillations such as tides, mean sea level changes and extreme events such as storm
surges and tsunamis.
As a consequence of the previous section, it is important to separate the deterministic part from
the henceforth designated as residual part. The deterministic part is due to tidal fluctuations and
long time scale fluctuations, whereas the residual is mostly due to meteorological events.
Considering the extremely low frequency of tsunamis, which hit the existing tidal gauges, these
time series have information concerning tides, storm surge events and the long term effect of
sea level changes, either due to climate changes or subsidence/shoaling. Attending to the
aforementioned factors and the deterministic character of tides it is possible to separate the so
24
called astronomical time series from the meteorological residuals. This analysis implies the
definition of the deterministic water surface elevation which can be modelled and is designated
by expected sea level.
According to IGP (2009), the Cascais tidal gauge (Portuguese tidal gauge with the longest
record - 1882 to 2000) record was analyzed and a sea level rise trend of 1.3 mm per year was
found. It should be mentioned that no land subsidence or shoaling was measured in the place
where the tidal gauge is installed thus this trend is expected to be related to climate changes.
Even though the Cascais tidal gauge is located further south of Viana do Castelo, it is used as
an approximation for the order of magnitude of the same phenomena in the Viana do Castelo
tidal gauge, provided there is no local subsidence or shoaling phenomena.
This approximation is also necessary since there is limited data for the Viana do Castelo tidal
gauge, only from 1979 to 2010. This fact makes impossible a straightforward comparison to the
same trend in Cascais without considering it. Nonetheless, the existence of
subsidence/shoaling should be known beforehand for the recorded period and this fact
considered in a convenient way.
To separate the deterministic astronomical part from the residuals the T_TIDE software
package (Pawlowicz et al., 2002) can be used. This software package has in its source code
the algorithm to compute, for a certain confidence interval, the most significant tidal constituents
and extract the obtained residuals.
The astronomic time series is determined based on the different harmonic components from the
periodic movement of the Sun and the Moon. The meteorological part of the record can thus be
obtained from the difference between the tidal gauge original record and the astronomic time
series. With the T_TIDE software package it is possible to assess the significance of the
different tidal harmonic constituents with a procedure based on the ratio between the amplitude
of a certain constituent and the corresponding error in determining it, squared. This parameter is
designated as Signal-to-Noise power Ratio (SNR).
In figure 3.1 the recorded time series is presented and the T_TIDE analysis output is shown.
th th
Two surge events can be observed: the first took place during the 8 - 9 October 1987 with a
th
maximum of approximately 40 cm, and the second with a larger value of 80 cm during the 14
th
16 October 1987.
When modelling storm surge events, both astronomical and meteorological forcing must be
considered. In the calibration process a time series, which has been subjected to a careful
analysis, may be considered.
25
Figure 3.1 Separation of the astronomic tide and residuals for the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge in
October 1987 [adapted from Arajo et al., 2010].
3.4 Worldwide storm surge modelling

In this section, experience from different authors in modelling storm surges is briefly presented.
Excessive detail is avoided by only presenting the most important and relevant works on storm
surge modelling. From the vast quantity of information available several reports from different
authors were selected and the most important findings are herein reproduced. The presenting
order will be as close as possible to the modelling sequence and secondly to the chronological
history.
3.4.1 Domain size influence
Blain et al. (1994) assess the influence of the domain size on the response of a hurricane storm
surge model. As an introduction it is referred the influence of the governing equations, the
boundary conditions, the forcing functions, the numerics, the grid structure and the
computational domain.
For the purpose of assessing the influence of the domain size in the computed surge, different
domains have been considered: one considering only the Florida coast (28.5N - 30.5N |
84.0W - 87.5W), other the Gulf of Mexico (~18N - 31N | 81W - 98W) and another the East
coast (~9N - 46N | 60W - 98W). These are presented in figure 3.2 where it is possible to
distinguish the hurricane path. The hurricane path is very important since some insight into the
storm spatial and temporal scale can be acquired.
Several computations were made including each of these domains and two different boundary
conditions tested: still water level and inverted barometer effect. After the different scenarios
were analyzed, the authors concluded that storm surge model domains that are largely situated
on the continental shelf and with a domain smaller than the size of the storm to be modelled
underestimate significantly the primary storm surge response. This is due to the difficulty in
setting adequate and realistic boundary conditions when these are inside the continental shelf,
where significant surge levels are observed which are the purpose of the study.
26
Underestimation of the surge height was observed for the Florida coast domain which has its
boundaries located in the continental shelf domain. It was also found that Helmholtz nodes
might be excited for the Gulf of Mexico domain leading to resonance effects, which must be
accounted for. As a final note it is stressed the need to assure the model convergence for the
discretized grid as well as for the domain size.
Figure 3.2 Track of hurricane Kate through the western North Atlantic Ocean into the Gulf of
Mexico from 1800 UTM November 15, 1985 to 1800 UTM November 23, 1985 and approximate
domains modelled. Continuous line Florida coast domain, dashed line Gulf of Mexico domain
and dotted line East coast domain (adapted from Blain et al., 1994).
3.4.2 Grid convergence
As a sequence of the previous study by Blain et al. (1994) the grid convergence problem is
addressed here since it was found to strongly affect the prediction of hurricane storm surge.
According to Blain et al. (1998) the discretization of the computational domain affects the
computed surge elevations throughout the entire domain. If in deep water zones the grid has
insufficient resolution, under predicted surge levels are expected. This is the result of lack of
detail in the atmospheric pressure data interpolated into the grid which does not represent the
inverted barometer peak adequately - figure 3.3. Over shallow waters the opposite is observed,
under resolution implies overprediction of the surge height at the coast. Simulations have also
27
show that the most critical factor for accuracy of storm surge computations is the near-shore
resolution.
The same authors also mentioned that the coastline complexity as well as the extent of very
shallow waters should be considered in the grid discretization. Moreover, the different element
size requirements indicate that a graded grid structure is most appropriate. This grading must
reflect the rate of change of the physics being much slower in deep waters than in shallow
coastal waters, near irregular coastlines and complex bathymetry changes.
Bearing this information in mind when generating meshes, enhanced computational efficiency
and accurate results for the surge height prediction can be achieved. In figure 3.4 the effect of
the number of elements in the wave shape is presented.
Figure 3.3 Schematic representation of a Figure 3.4 Effect of the number of elements in
smeared or damped inverted barometer the wave shape [adapted from Howlett (2005)].
forcing function over a coarse grid
discretization (adapted from Blain et al. 1998).
3.4.3 Astronomy and meteorology interaction
While attempting to reproduce the recorded water levels for a certain period by numerical
models there are several methods which are likely to achieve satisfactory results. It is frequent
the need to consider not only the astronomical effects but also the meteorology. Among the
different options to simulate, the most commonly used are considering the astronomy only,
meteorology only or astronomy and meteorology jointly.
In case the astronomy and the meteorology are not considered both acting together, the model
should be run for each alone and the resulting water levels added up. It should be mentioned
that in case both processes are not independent this methodology is misleading since the sum
of the obtained results is not the same as if both processes are considered together.
Independency depends on local effects which can lead to energy transfer between these
processes.
According to Fanjul et al. (1998), who studied the effect of non linear interactions between
harmonic constituents in shallow areas, in areas where wide continental platform exists
nonlinear transfer of energy between tidal constituents occurs. The same is applied to tides and
surges where it is mentioned that in places where a narrow continental is present the effect of
28
nonlinear transfers of energy is not significant. The study was focused in the Iberian Atlantic
coast where the continental platform is narrow around the western part of the Iberian Peninsula
and non linear effects are not significant. Nonetheless, in the French coast of the Bay of Biscay
significant nonlinear generation of higher harmonics was observed.
The effect of nonlinear transference between astronomy and meteorology was assessed with
more detail by Fanjul et al. (2001). The used methodology consisted of computing firstly the
effect of the astronomy and meteorology in the sea surface elevation level and after the
astronomical effects only. Once this was performed, the residuals were obtained by subtracting
the two results. These results where then compared to the results obtained from a simulation
considering the meteorology only for the assessment of a forecast system. It was noticed the
importance of considering the Gibraltar strait while modelling this phenomenon.
3.5 Historical analysis of the storm surge phenomena along the

Portuguese coast
In Portugal a large number of storms, which have hit the coast, were recorded. Some of the
storms have had severe consequences on coastal structures and some have caused floods in
the coastal areas. The major part of these damages can be explained not only due to the high
wind speed, wave action and impact on structures but also due to the storm surge. The surges
are recorded by tidal gauges and its presence can be observed after extraction of the
deterministic part from the records. In the time series obtained by extracting this part most of the
variation can be explained by storm surges and other meteorological effects. The remaining part
of these residuals are thought to be due to river flow changes, where extreme river flows have
an impact on the tidal gauge area, and in case of extremely high waves, the induced set-up can
also play a role.
The storm surge phenomenon in the Portuguese coast has been analyzed by Gama et al..
(1994). The analysis considered a two years period between June 1986 and May 1988 in which
15 storms occurred. In this period, the maximum storm surge level recorded was 110 cm by the
th th
Viana do Castelo tidal gauge in the period 14 -16 October 1987.
Gama et al. (1994) also mentioned that this event has occurred during neaps waters originating
a water level +2.5 m HZ. If this event has occurred during high water springs it could have been
instead +5.0 m HZ. This water level combined with high significant wave heights and the
corresponding set-up and run-up can cause extreme damage in coastal areas where protection
does not exists or the existing is not sufficient, especially in front of areas with strong urban
structures. The effect of this can be even increased in places with narrow and low dune
stretches.
Regarding the assessment of storm surge agents and its influence, in figure 3.5 it is possible to
clearly identify the atmospheric pressure significance (Taborda and Dias, 1992). This statement
is supported by the existing correlation between the recorded water level and the atmospheric
pressure change. This is the only location presented here since the phenomena do not change
29
significantly for other stations. This indicates that most of the surge height can be explained by
the pressure difference. It should also be noted that only considering this factor will
underestimate the surge since it is known that other factors also play a role.
Figure 3.5 Comparison between the storm surge height for Leixes tidal gauge and the
atmospheric pressure change recorded at the meteorological station of Pedras Rubras. (adapted
from Taborda and Dias, 1992).
3.6 Previous storm surge modelling for the Portuguese coast

In this section the previous storm surge modelling effort for the Portuguese Coast is referred in
detail. This analysis will be based in the previous work of Arajo et al. (2010(a)), Arajo et al.
(2010(b)) and Arajo et al. (2011). These researchers focused their work in the analysis of the
th th
14 16 October 1987 storm, and, since this serves as background for the present thesis, a
detailed overview and partial description is presented herein.
The presentation will be chronological and will serve as support for some of the decisions taken
in the present dissertation. This is done so that the same steps were not repeated where not
needed and to go further into the modelling issues which arise during the modelling process.
3.6.1 Initial approach
This subsection is based in the work of Arajo et al. (2010(a)) using the ADCIRC model. In this
initial stage of the modelling procedure several aspects are assessed.
First the computational domain was determined in such a way that the oceanic boundary is
located in deep waters as recommended by Blain et al. (1994). Consequently the domain is
defined from 8.67 to 16.19W and 39.4 to 43N and presented in figure 3.6. The land
boundary was located at a depth of 12 m along the coast. This domain was defined in such a
way that the minimum possible domain size which is capable of capturing the phenomena is
used.
After the domain has been set, the DEM had to be incorporated in a mesh with a quality
considered as adequate. This mesh has 30360 nodes and 59527 elements ranging from 480 m
along the coast to 14500 m on the ocean boundary, as presented in figure 3.7.
30
Figure 3.6 Computational domain, extending for 400 km along the West Iberian Coast and 615 km
into the Atlantic Ocean [adapted from Arajo et al., (2010(a)].
Figure 3.7 Unstructured mesh with triangular elements generated for the computational domain
with 30360 nodes and 59527 elements designated as Grid12 [adapted from Arajo et al., (2010(a)].
For this mesh different aspects were assessed: bottom friction, wind speed and the
meteorological forcing. Concerning the bottom friction influence, the authors concluded that a
linear bottom friction shows a better phase agreement whereas the quadratic and hybrid
formulation a better agreement in amplitude. It should also be noted that both the quadratic and
hybrid friction formulation show very similar results, to the point of not being possible to visually
distinguish the differences.
For Arajo et al. [2010(a)] the phase correspondence is preferred in relation to the amplitude fit.
After this, the wind set-up effect was simulated and it was concluded that only for wind speeds
larger than 10 m/s the wind has significant effect. The wind effect might not be captured
31
adequately considering the fact the model boundary is located at a depth of 12 m. It was then
concluded that an extension towards shallower zones might yield better results.
In figure 3.8 it can be seen the effect of the storm which hit the Portuguese coast in the period
th th
14 16 October 1987. It is also possible to conclude that the meteorology and the
astronomical effects are not independent, existing an energy transfer between them.
Figure 3.8 Comparison between the recorded water surface elevation and the obtained results at
the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge for the meteorological and astronomical forcings jointly and
separately [adapted from Arajo et al., 2010(a)].
For the discrepancies between the simulated and the observed data the authors have
mentioned several potential reasons: the insufficiency of the model domain extension, an
excessively large coastal water depth limiting the wave propagation modifications in shallow
waters, a possible discrepancy between the available meteorological and gauge data, the
absence of the wave set-up effect, a very coarse grid in the nearshore zone and the influence of
the river flow.
3.6.2 Improved model setup
Considering the typical modelling process where several iterations and options are worked out,
Mazzolari (2010) has made several changes to the previous work developed by Arajo et al.
[2010(a)].
Among the most important changes, the coastline has been relocated from a depth of 12 m to a
depth of 4 m. This option was taken at a preliminary stage to keep a lower computational effort
since element density increases according to the depth reduction. Additionally, the grid
resolution has been enhanced and the domain size has been enlarged both in latitude and
longitude. These options were considered in order to assess the grid size effect on the
computed water level. This allows a decrease of the boundary location effect on the computed
water levels and a better representation of the meteorological pattern under investigation (Blain
et al., 1994; Mazzolari, 2010).
Firstly a twofold refinement was applied to Grid12 originating the mesh Grid12F2. This mesh
has roughly 120000 nodes and 240000 elements ranging from 230 m to 5000 m. The simulation
32
was run for the same parameters as previously, except for the time step, which was decreased
proportionally from 30 s to 15 s. Mazzolari (2010) concluded that the effect of increasing the grid
resolution is to slightly dampen the tidal signal while not affecting the phase agreement. This
must be taken into account since it might be symptomatic of an inadequate mesh generation.
The same process is applied to a mesh with the coastline boundary at a depth of 4 m and the
results are presented in figure 3.9. These meshes were designated as Grid4 and Grid4F2 for
the two fold refinement.
Figure 3.9 Computed time series at the Viana do Castelo reference station for Grid4 and Grid4F2
for a model coastline boundary at a depth of 4 m [adapted from Mazzolari (2010)].
The work from Mazzolari (2010) shows that the effect of refining the mesh is not of significant
importance, nonetheless, the time step reduction implies that the effect of convergence might
not be completely attributed to the mesh grading but also to a time step reduction. Also
according to the same author, considering the T2 tidal constituent might prove to be important
for the best representation of the peaks.
With the mesh GRID4 a run was performed imposing the meteorological forcing and an inverted
barometer condition along the domain ocean boundaries. The results from this simulation are
presented in figure 3.10 as well as the inverted barometer effect at the Viana do Castelo tidal
gauge. The obtained results show that the wind effect is less than 10% of the recorded surge
(approximately 5 cm) whereas the pressure effect is roughly 25% (approximately 22 cm). As
shown in the graph this result in a modelled surge height of 27 cm, while the recorded surge
height is 80 cm.
This might be attributed to several effects such as a more extensive calibration process, the
inclusion of astronomy as a source of nonlinear contribution (Fanjul et al., 2001), wave set-up
and river discharge (Mazzolari, 2010). This result indicates that even though the wind effect is
weaker than the inverted barometer effect, none of these agents can be disregarded.
After this process a new domain is defined. This ranges from 8W to 34 and from 18N to 48N
in order to include a large portion of the Atlantic ocean as other authors have considered
33
(Albiach et al., 2000; Fanjul et al., 2001). The comparison between the two domains is
presented in figure 3.11. In figure 3.12 the mesh DTM01 is shown. This mesh has 61000 nodes
and 119000 elements ranging from 80000 m in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean to 220 m along
the Portuguese coastline.
Figure 3.10 Comparison between the computed surge elevation for wind and pressure forcing
only and the inverted barometer effect from the sea level atmospheric pressure at the Viana do
Castelo tidal gauge [adapted from Mazzolari (2010)].
Figure 3.11 New domain envelope and comparison with the previously used domain (yellow area)
[adapted from Mazzolari (2010)].
34
Figure 3.12 Mesh DTM01 [adapted from Mazzolari (2010)].
3.6.3 The 14th 16th October 1987 storm modelling
After the research of Arajo et al. (2010a) and Mazzolari (2010) new developments were
revealed. These can be observed in Arajo et al. (2011). From the latest work the most
important results are presented herein. An almost perfect fit between the computed and
observed water surface elevation for the astronomical component during the storm event period
is revealed in figure 3.13.
Figure 3.13 Computed and observed water elevation at the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge for the
astronomical component during the storm period of October 1987 [adapted from Arajo et al.
(2010)].
In figure 3.14 the observed and computed surge residuals for the event of October 1987 are
depicted. The model input consisted of sea level pressure and wind fields for the first simulation;
and sea level pressure, wind and wave radiation stresses for the second simulation. The results
reveal how important the consideration of the wave set-up (via the radiation stresses) is to
improve the model skill in reproducing the storm surge records. This model skill is defined in
section 4.2.
35
Figure 3.14 Observed and computed surge residuals for the event of October 1987 [adapted from
Arajo et al. (2011)].
In figure 3.14 an increase in the peak storm surge height of approximately 15 cm can be seen
with the consideration of the wave effects. In figure 3.15 the final results are presented which
clearly show the influence of considering the interaction between astronomy and meteorology
jointly or separately. This is important since it clearly shows that for the used model setup it is
different to simulate a storm event using the astronomical and meteorological forcings jointly or
separately.
Figure 3.15 Computed time series for the astronomical and meteorological forcing, applied
simultaneously and separately, and comparison with the sea level observations at the Viana do
Castelo tidal gauge [adapted from Arajo et al. (2011)].
36
3.7 Modelling concepts
Numerical or experimental modelling is intended to reproduce as accurately and realistically as

possible natural phenomena. In the present dissertation a numerical model was chosen as the
most adequate tool capable of simulating storm surge phenomena. This modelling work
involves several phases which must be done sequentially and constitute a condition sine qua
non to a successful simulation to be performed. The following concepts and procedures are
presented for pedagogical reasons and as introduction to modelling.
Firstly the type of model must be chosen. This choice is at a more strategic level done by
observing the different tools available, in the market and as open source, which are able to
model hydrodynamic processes. After this first assessment the temporal and spatial scale of the
project must be assessed and, at the same time, the fundamental processes identified to
narrow the options range.
Once the model choice is between a few different options, economic, model availability and
previous modelling experience criteria are considered. For the present study, considering the
temporal scale in the order of days to weeks and a spatial scale in the order of hundreds of
meters to a couple thousand kilometres, the model should be able to solve the most important
existing processes for those scales. Once the scales involved are known the fundamental
processes must be identified being, for the present work, tidal forcing, wind setup and inverted
barometer effect. The ADCIRC model has been developed mainly considering these factors,
and thus is the model chosen for the present dissertation.
Once the model was chosen, it is necessary to know the required steps, the processes to be
simulated and the modelling sequence. Without going into the fine details yet, these will always
involve bathymetry data, boundary conditions, tidal forcing constituents, mesh generation, time
settings, calibration and validation.
Considering the specific character of the other steps, in this section the calibration and
validation processes are briefly described. Even though both calibration and validation involve
model output and recorded data analysis, they correspond to different stages in the modelling
process. Calibration is the process of fine tuning the physical and/or the numerical parameters
after an initial model setup is defined. This tuning is achieved by changing the model
parameters in order to obtain an output as similar as possible to a recorded time series. This
comparison is made after an initial run and repeated until a desired level or the best possible
level of match is achieved.
In the present dissertation this calibration stage involves changing the bottom friction coefficient
and formulation, the wave continuity parameters, the time step, the ramp value, the lateral
viscosity and the Coriolis parameter. Once the model parameters are set, the modelling process
continues towards different analysis. This analysis comprises the modelling of different
37
situations such as for a different location inside the model boundaries, for different periods or for
additional phenomena. These outputs are also compared with recorded time series, harmonic
constituents or extracted residuals.
To compare the model output and the observed data, several methods can be used. The most
important of these are visual comparison and statistical analysis. In the present dissertation, the
visual comparison is used as a first approach and where finer or smaller variations exist. RMSE,
bias, accuracy and skill concepts are used as well as more standard statistical tools. Possible
additional tools are the maximum difference (relative and absolute) and the standard deviation.
This analysis can be made both in the time domain or the frequency domain. An analysis in the
frequency domain, since it involves more demanding tools and is more time consuming, is used
only used as a final comparison for the model exploration and validation of the obtained
parameters.
38
4 Numerical model description
4.1 ADCIRC model
4.1.1 Introduction
Numerical modelling of natural phenomena consists of finding a numerical solution for the
differential equations which explain the physical processes. These equations are commonly
designated as Navier-Stokes equations and they are simplified based on the assumptions valid
for the intended physical process. Even with the aforementioned hypothesis, these equations
can only be solved analytically for very simple problems with a reduced interest for common
coastal engineering applications. Considering this, it is necessary to solve them with the aid of
numerical techniques applied to conceptual models.
Among the models which can solve these equations, ADCIRC was chosen. Typical applications
of this model are: tidal wave propagation, wind induced circulation, storm surge, dredging
feasibility assessment, sediment deposition, larvae transport and nearshore operations [8].
This choice was based in all the previous experience and the model capacities. The model
restrictions are known and do not hinder the purpose of this study. Among the model capacities
which can be used are the number of available boundaries, tidal, wind and waves forcing, the
wetting/drying algorithm and the inclusion of radiation stresses. The model is also adequate to
simulate these phenomena with the inherent time scale in the intended domain.
It should be mentioned that in order to be valid the 2D Depth Integrated (2DDI) equations
considered in the ADCIRC model, the horizontal spatial scale of the phenomena must be
significantly larger than the vertical scale. These can be further related to the shallow water
equations for which the streamlines curvature and the particles vertical acceleration can be
neglected in respect to the x and y movement components. The horizontal spatial scale ranges
from approximately 100 m (inside the estuary) to hundreds of km (oceanic domain) and the
vertical scale from ~10 to ~5000 m, respectively. The time scale ranges from a couple of
minutes to a few weeks.
Model limitations must be known prior to use in order to know what may be simulated and what
might not or need creative solutions. Among the ADCIRC model limitations the time step is one
of the most important factors since the model equations are solved using an implicit method
instead of explicit. This implies that stability issues might arise for excessively large time steps.
The ADCIRC model does not allow morphological changes during the simulation period and, if a
narrow dune string protects or exists in the model domain and the storm is expected to erode it,
the used model might not provide satisfactory results. This can be extremely important in case
of significant storm duration (Roelvink et al., 2009). For the morphological evolution of the coast
more adequate models exist which are able to simulate the evolution of the coast such as
XBeach, Delft3D, Unibest, etc.
39
4.1.2 Model description
The Advanced Circulation Multi-dimensional Hydrodynamic Model (ADCIRC) is a numerical

model based on the finite element approach which allows the modelling of long period waves in
2D or 3D. The primary equations solved in the model are the momentum and the continuity
equations.
In coastal engineering applications incompressibility, hydrostatic pressure and Boussinesq

approximations are considered before preparing the iterative algorithm which will solve these
equations. The incompressibility hypothesis assumes that and the hydrostatic pressure
approximation that no baroclinic effects are observed. This can be further explained considering
the water column to be well mixed and thus h meaning a linear variation with the water
depth. The Boussinesq assumption, a turbulent closure model, considers that eddy momentum
transferences can be modelled assuming a certain value for the eddy viscosity. This implies that
only one turbulent scale can be described, even so this fact is not of major importance while
using the shallow water equations and it is usually kept for numerical reasons (Trigo-Teixeira,
1993).
The primary equations which are solved in ADCIRC 2DD are depth integrated and are
reproduced in expressions (4.1), (4.2) and (4.3). The first is the continuity equation and the
others the momentum equations respectively in the x and y horizontal directions written
considering the u and v velocities (Luettich et al., 1991; Luettich and Westerink, 2004).
(4.1)
(4.2)
(4.3)
where,
t Time,
, Longitude positive East of Greenwich and latitude (positive North of Equator),
Water surface elevation,
U, V Depth-averaged horizontal velocities,
H = + h Total water column thickness,
h Bathymetric depth,
f Coriolis parameter,
R Earth radius,
0 Reference density,
g Gravitational acceleration,
Earth elasticity factor,
40
Newtonian equilibrium tidal potential (see expression 4.4),
Ps Atmospheric pressure at the sea surface,

sx, sy Imposed surface stresses in x and y direction, respectively,
bx, by Bottom stress components in x and y direction, respectively.

From Reid (1990) the Newtonian equilibrium tidal potential is presented in expression (4.4).
(4.4)
where
Cjn constant characterizing the amplitude of tidal constituent n of species j;
fjn time-dependant nodal factor;
vjn time-dependent astronomical argument;
j = 0, 1, 2 tidal species (j=0 - declinational; j=1 - diurnal; j=2 - semidiurnal);
;
;
;
t Time;
t0 reference time;
Tjn period of constituent n of species j.
In the continuity and momentum equations all the nonlinear terms are maintained and they can
be solved using a Cartesian or spherical coordinate system. The aforementioned equations are
solved in the 2DDI option in two horizontal dimensions considering the water level and the
following depth averaged variables: u velocity and v velocity. For the 3D model option these
equations are solved to find four variables: water level and the velocity field components without
vertical integration.
Considering an adequate coordinate transformation, as presented in expressions (4.5) and
(4.6), it is possible to obtain the Generalized Wave Continuity Equation (GWCE) expression
(4.7) - and the two vertically integrated momentum equations expressions (4.8) and (4.9).
(4.5)
(4.6)
where,
Longitude and Latitude of the projection reference point,
R Earth Radius,
x, y Cartesian coordinates.
The linearized two-dimensional GWCE is presented in expression (4.7).
(4.7)
41
The two-dimensional, linearized non-conservative momentum equations are presented in
expressions (4.8) and (4.9).
(4.8)
(4.9)
where,
Combination of bottom stresses and imposed surface stresses,
t Time,
x, y Cartesian coordinates,
deviation of the free surface from the geoid,
u, v depth-averaged velocities in the x-direction and in the y-direction, respectively.
It should be mentioned that the water surface elevation is obtained by solving the GWCE. The u
and v velocity components are obtained by solving the 2D momentum equations.
The model discretization in space is based in a finite element method approach materialized by
an unstructured mesh with triangular elements whereas in time a finite difference method is
used by choosing a certain time step . The presented equations are solved based upon the
spatial discretization using the Finite Element Method (FEM) and in time using the Finite
Differences Method (FDM). Further information concerning both methods can be obtained in
Cuvelier et al. (1986). In ADCIRC the 2DDI equations are discretized in space using Garlekin
Finite Elements (GFE) and in time using Three Level Finite Differences (TLFD).
In figure 4.1 the modelling process sequence is presented and serves as background for the
following subsections.
Bathymetry Boundary Model

Mesh
interpolation conditions parameters Run model
creation
to the mesh definition defintion
Figure 4.1 Modelling process sequence.
Considering the purpose of this thesis, an extensive presentation of the model required files and
interrelationship are not described here but, instead, they can be observed in [9]. In this website
the ADCIRC architecture is described including the required input files and output files.
42
4.1.3 Finite element mesh
As previously mentioned, a numerical model to solve the differential equations governing

physical processes implies the creation of a mesh for the studied domain. In ADCIRC, the
considered mesh type is of the denominated unstructured grid type or finite element mesh.
The finite differences type of mesh usually considers quadrilateral type of elements such as
rectangles whereas the finite elements mesh uses mainly triangles. A mesh is defined by a
boundary and, inside this boundary, by nodes which create elements when connected. The type
of mesh described here is two dimensional but the definition presented can be generalized for
three dimensions by considering parallelepipedons and tetrahedrons, respectively.
The mesh element type is of the utmost importance since elements assure the spatial
discretization of the differential equations which cannot be applied and solved directly. The
spatial derivatives present in the equations are not solved directly but instead they are
discretized using the FEM. A similar process is applied to the time derivatives which are solved
using the FDM. The resulting equations are possible to solve numerically for a certain time step
and the quality of the obtained solution depends on the properties of the used mesh.
To assure the good quality of a certain mesh, this must have a correct and as exact as possible
boundary conditions as well as a balanced number of elements. The spatial scale as well as the
nature of phenomena should be taken into account when defining the model domain (Blain et
al., 1994).
In addition to the spatial scale of the involved processes, special attention should be given to
the bathymetry and the expected gradients in the solution. For the studied case, this attention is
mainly focused in the bathymetry gradients, the shallow part of the domain and the distance to
the Lima estuary. This is shown as an increased density of the elements/nodes in the mesh.
This can be further explained by stating that each element and the adjacent should have similar
properties thus allowing for smaller gradients in spatial and time discretization. This is of the
paramount importance for model stability as well as to maintain the required number of
iterations under reasonable limits.
The ADCIRC model is based in unstructured triangular meshes. Comparing with other methods
such as the FDM the FEM has the advantage of being more effectively implemented in highly
irregular domains and allowing an adequate gradation of the element size wherever needed,
e.g. near the coastline or highly variable depths.
The following elements should be considered when defining a size function: a realistic
bathymetry and domain geometry reproduction; the balanced number of nodes and elements -
to assure a reasonable computational expense; a smooth and progressive element size
transition - to minimize the numerical errors and the local element density increase due to its
influence in the local fluid behaviour (CEHIDRO, 2004).
A good grading element capacity is of the utmost importance in large domains since it will allow
an extremely significant computational expense reduction. This type of mesh allows an easy
43
element division since each element can be subdivided in 3 or 4 elements with a simple
operation.
To obtain the most adequate mesh for a certain problem there are several factors which must
be taken into account such as sufficient knowledge, modeller experience and some creativity.
After a certain initial solution, some corrections can be used to improve the solution such as
global or local refinement, changing the mesh generation process, adaptation of the size
function among others.
The analysis of the mesh quality can be visual or the result of a test simulation which assesses
the duration and the convergence level of a certain solution for identical parameters. This
process is considered successful when the number of nodes is the minimum that allow
obtaining the same computational result as obtained with more dense meshes. This is stated
since there is a positive correlation between the computational expense and the mesh number
of nodes/elements.
According to [10] the main sources of model instability are the model geometry and design
(75%), the kinematic viscosity (10%), the roughness (10%) and other (5%). The efficiency of the
mesh allows an enormous reduction in the computational time being which is important for large
domains, domains with spatial scales ranging orders of magnitude, long periods of simulation or
a large number of simulated scenarios.
4.1.3.1 SMS mesh generation tools

The SMS software [11] allows the generation of meshes using different algorithms: Patch,
Paving and Scalar Paving Density (SPD) [12]. Among these options the SPD is considered
since it allows the most automatic quality mesh generation. This is based in the user creation of
a certain size function that will serve as a starting point for the generation of the mesh.
The chosen method is based on the report for the Leixes harbour done by Hartwing (2005)
where the SMS software was used and the three techniques compared. This method, when
compared to the paving technique, has the advantage of not requiring the definition of the
boundary node spacing manually. Instead, the algorithm defines it automatically from the
chosen size function. The Patch technique implies quadrangular domains thus not
representing an option.
The Paving option is an advancing front mesh generation based algorithm. This technique
starts the generation process from the domain boundary vertices and by adding new nodes in
the domain in such a way that approximately equilateral triangles are created. With the new
polygon subsequently created, the previous method is performed iteratively until the entire the
domain is covered. The vertices in the model boundary must be defined manually. The SPD
technique allows a greater flexibility by the definition of a scalar density function which will be
used to create the mesh elements. This allows the desired spatial grading for the entire domain
instead of only to the model boundary. In this way it constitutes a major upgrade from the
Paving technique and justifies the recommendation to use the SPD technique to mesh
generation.
44
4.1.3.2 Size function definition
For the definition of a good size function, different criteria can be considered, the most frequent
of which is the relationship between the wave length and element size. The wave length is
determined based on the shallow water wave celerity and it is considered since the tidal wave
propagates as a shallow water wave in the ocean. Meaning that the tidal wave propagates with
a much higher velocity than its particles.
Based on expression (4.10) and Hagen et al. (2001), recommending that the value of / must
be smaller than 40, it is possible to define a general size function.
(4.10)
where,
T Wave period (~12.42 h for the M2 component),
Length of the triangle edge,
h Water depth,
Wave length.
Another way to determine a size function is by considering the Courant number, expression
(4.11). This Courant Number is strongly related to the model numerical stability and will be
described here with some detail. The time step should be defined according to the mesh
element size and the water depth in such a way that the CN is kept under one to assure
numerical stability criteria. This condition can be described as following: the parcel is the
travel speed of a free surface wave in shallow water, can be seen as the speed the
model evolves in each time step, thus the condition present in expression (4.11) can be
described as a condition to assure that the wave does not propagate faster than the computing
velocity.
(4.11)
where,
CN Courant Number,
h - Maximum element depth,
Time step,
Minimum element size.
The aforementioned size function can be defined not only based in the recommendation of
Hagen et al. (2001) but also closely related to the Courant Friedrich-Levy (CFL) condition
(Rebordo and Trigo-Teixeira, 2009). Computational economy can be achieved by considering
a balance between the time step and the element size since a fine mesh implies a small time
step and a coarse mesh even though not reproducing so well the domain morphology allows a
larger time step, thus reducing the computational expense.
45
4.1.4 Model setup process description
In this section the setup of the model is described in detail. The model setup involves the
definition of a domain, boundary conditions, numerical and physical parameters, the model
bathymetry as well as the forcing conditions. The model domain is defined according to the type
of phenomena to be simulated and the boundary conditions must be coherent with the
considered domain.
There are two main methods to build models in SMS: the direct approach and the conceptual
modelling approach. The direct approach is only suited for very simple models and, therefore,
the conceptual modelling approach, where it is possible to set different boundaries before the
mesh is generated, was used [11].
Numerical solving conditions comprise the type of solution and convergence criteria, the
physical parameters are the friction coefficient, wave continuity, lateral viscosity and Coriolis
option, the bathymetry is the data existing for the domain and the forcing conditions can be
tides, wind, atmospheric pressure, waves and river flows.
4.1.4.1 General options

In the ADCIRC model control options, it is possible to consider different type of terms: finite
amplitude, advective and time derivative. These are described based in [13]. The finite
amplitude terms are related to the linearization of the water depth. This linearization consists in
using the bathymetric depth (h) instead of the total water depth (H). Related to this option it is
also possible to consider the wetting and drying of elements. The advective terms are related to
the spatial derivatives which are present in momentum and GWCE. The time derivative terms
are related to the consideration of the time derivative portion of the advective terms that occur in
the GWCE.
To obtain a model output with the intended data, the recording stations, duration, results storing
frequency as well as the parameters to store (elevation, velocity, meteorological) must be
defined. The recording stations must be placed in places where tidal gauges exist and other
strategic places, particularly if during the calibration phase numerical instabilities occur in order
to accomplish a good insight into the phenomena.
4.1.4.2 Domain definition and boundary conditions

The domain should be defined according to the area for which the processes are to be
simulated. This domain should be defined in such a way that it covers the minimum area
needed and closely related to the spatial scale of the simulated processes. This domain can be
defined based in geographic/ cartesian coordinates, an existing coastline, a circular boundary, a
rectangular shape or a combination of these.
Once the model domain is defined the boundary conditions should be specified. For the
definition of these boundaries in ADCIRC, several options are available: Mainland, Island,
Normal Flow, Normal wave radiation, Mainland barrier, Island Barrier, Weir, Zero
normal velocity gradient or Ocean. For the majority of the project only the Mainland and the
46
Ocean boundary types are used and thus will be described with greater detail. Once this part
has evolved for inside the estuary, the Normal flow boundary is used in order to model the
river flow.
For the Mainland boundary type there are 3 different boundary conditions: Essential,
Essential with tangential slip and Natural with tangential slip. Considering the information
present in the final part of the ADCIRC generated fort.16 file it is possible to state that none of
the Mainland boundary conditions consider the existence of flow normal to this boundary.
Furthermore the Natural boundary condition considers free tangential slip. The Essential
boundary condition allows the modeller to choose if tangential slip exists or not.
The Essential boundary condition with tangential slip is intended to represent a boundary
where a strong non normal flow is verified and free tangential slip is allowed. This is applied by
zeroing the normal boundary flux integral in the continuity equation and by zeroing the normal
velocity in the momentum equations. This boundary condition should satisfy no normal flow in a
global sense and no normal flow at each boundary node [13].
The Essential boundary condition without tangential slip is intended to represent a boundary
where strong non normal flow is verified and no tangential slip is allowed. This is applied by
zeroing the normal boundary flux integral in the continuity equation and by setting the velocity =
0 rather than solving momentum equations along the boundary. This boundary condition should
satisfy no normal flow in a global sense and zero velocity at each boundary node [13].
The Natural boundary condition is intended to represent a mainland boundary with a weak no
normal flow and free tangential slip. This is applied by zeroing the normal boundary flux integral
in the continuity equation. There is no constraint on velocity (normal or tangential) applied in the
momentum equations. This boundary condition should satisfy no normal flow in a global sense,
but will only satisfy no normal flow at each boundary node in the limit of infinite resolution.
In the Ocean boundary type it is possible to define the boundary conditions as Tidal
Constituents, Specify single curve and Extract from dataset. The Tidal Constituents option
allows the consideration of tidal harmonic constituents. These constituents can be obtained
from the Le Provost database. These are then associated to the ADCIRC model by assigning a
value of amplitude and phase to each node. In a later stage of the project the Extract from
dataset option is used to set the boundary as an inverted barometer boundary.
The Le Provost database (Le Provost et al., 1994) is a global repository where the amplitude
and phase of 13 tidal constituents are stored. This is then processed by ADCIRC to determine
the amplitude and phase based on the coordinates of each node.
4.1.4.3 Model setup parameters

After the model domain and the boundary conditions are set, it is necessary to define the model
parameters. These parameters are responsible not only for the numerical stability,
computational solving algorithm definition and time-frame definition but also for the definition of
the physical parameters of the domain to be modelled.
47
The physical parameters that must be set are the Coriolis factor value, the friction coefficient
and the lateral viscosity. The Coriolis factor can be defined as having a constant value or as
variable and thus being computed by ADCIRC as a function of the latitude for each mesh node.
The friction coefficient formulation can be set as Constant quadratic, Constant linear or
Constant Hybrid and its value must be defined.
The numerical parameters responsible for the model stability are the Wave continuity and the
Lateral Viscosity. The Wave continuity parameter should have the greatest possible value to
verify the mass conservation but for the numerical stability of the model the lower this value is
the better. The lateral viscosity parameter is defined as the spatially constant horizontal eddy
viscosity for the momentum equations and is thought to have a strong influence in the wind
shear stress but not in the astronomic forcing.
The Coriolis parameter is defined as , where is the angular speed of Earth

rotation and is the latitude of the place where this factor is computed. This factor can be
defined as constant for a chosen latitude, which is adequate for domains with a small latitude
range but for larger domains may not constitute the better option. This option must be assessed
and will be tested later on.
The friction coefficient must be calibrated and the model expressions are presented in (4.12)
and (4.13). In table 4.1 the different formulations and corresponding expressions are presented.
(4.12)
(4.13)
2
Considering the fact and have [L/T ] units and U and V [L/T] units, from a dimensional
-1 -1
analysis, it is possible to see that has [T ] units, thus has [T ] units in the Linear
formulation whereas for both the Constant quadratic and Constant Hybrid formulation this
parameter is dimensionless.
These different formulations allow adjusting the type of model used. Observing the expressions
it is possible to conclude that the constant linear formulation is only valid for processes and
domains where the velocities are assumed to have small variations or the friction coefficient can
be assumed constant for the velocity range. For more complex processes the friction coefficient
is expected to change with the velocities and water depth thus being more adequate for oceanic
and coastal processes.
Table 4.1 Friction formulations and associated expressions (adapted from Rebordo and Trigo-
Teixeira, 2009)
Formulation Constant Linear Constant quadratic Constant hybrid*
Expression
* Rebordo (2008) for further information concerning the effect of the wave breaking index on Cf
48
4.1.4.4 Time options
The time parameters that must be defined in order to run a simulation for the desired period are
the time step, the ramp value and the simulation period. As previously mentioned , the time step
directly influences the size of the mesh elements and the model stability by means of the
Courant Number (CN) and must be chosen wisely.
The influence of the ramp value is felt during the first part of the simulation when the model is
warmed up from the initial condition to the full forcing dynamics. The effect of the ramp value is
stronger in the initial model numerical stability and increasingly important as the initial water
level and velocities are more disjointed with the forcing.
The ramp value must be defined with a reasonable value in such a way that initial oscillations
do not affect the model stability. This period is intended to avoid or control the artificial
oscillations that happen in the beginning of the simulation and must be set according to the size
of the domain, the time step and the difference between the first expected model steady state
solution and the initial condition. This period is recommended to range from a few hours to
several days being the modeller sensibility important to set a reasonable value.
Finally, the total simulation period must be defined in such a way that the desired purpose of the
project is achieved. The time step can be combined with the ramp value in order to reduce the
need of warming up the model. The reduction of the required warming up period can be
achieved by decreasing the time step in order to reduce the initial instabilities.
4.2 Model performance analysis

While simulating natural processes an output is generated by the model. This output should not
be accepted without a critical eye in order to avoid misleading or incorrect results. Bearing this
in mind, the model output must be compared to observed and/or theoretical information. Visual
comparison of model output plots versus observed data and statistical indicators are among the
available tools to assess this.
Visual comparison can be performed if the plot is carefully made and the information precision
is sufficient for a good assessment. It should be stressed that this type of analysis is highly
subjective and varies from modeller to modeller. Among the most useful and objective available
tools are statistical indicators. Considering the character of time series, an adequate statistical
analysis might be done using the time series resulting from the differences between computed
and observed data.
The useful statistical indicators are computed based on these differences since the absolute
values information is not very useful when comparing the correlation and proximity between a
modelled scenario and the recorded. The indicators used are the bias, accuracy, skill, the
maximum and minimum relative differences, the standard deviation and the root mean square
error.
49
According to Sutherland et al. (2004), bias, accuracy and skill can be defined, for the purpose of
the present thesis, as presented in expressions (4.14), (4.15) and (4.16), respectively. The
maximum and minimum relative difference, the standard deviation and the root mean square
error are defined as commonly mentioned in the literature. The skill parameter can be seen as a
measure of the model predictive capacity in relation to the observations. This parameter ranges
from negative values to one, corresponding the value one to a total agreement between
observations and the model results.
(4.14)
(4.15)
(4.16)
50
5 Existing data analysis
5.1 Atmospheric pressure data

In this chapter the atmospheric pressure datasets obtained from NOAA, ECMWF and IH are
analysed. Considering the importance of obtaining the most accurate and reliable data to use as
input in the model, the datasets are compared and the differences are assessed. A description
of the different data sources is presented, the differences are calculated and statistically
analysed for different periods.
The atmospheric pressure data obtained from IH correspond to the recorded atmospheric
pressure at mean sea level. This data is recorded at the weather station of Areosa wastewater
treatment plant located in the northern part of Viana do Castelo. The geographic coordinates of
this station are 41 42 28.769 N and 08 51 29.504 W (WGS84).
For this station, information was recorded between 5.30pm 8th of August 2002 and 11.30pm
31st December 2010, every 30 min. It should be mentioned that in this interval there are some
st rd
periods without available information. Between 7:00 a.m. 21 December 2004 and 2:00 p.m. 3
th th
January 2005 as well as between 4:30 p.m. of the 11 February 2008 and 4:30 p.m. of the 28
April 2010 there is no recorded data.
The sea level atmospheric pressure data can also be obtained from the US National Center for
Environmental Prediction NCEP/NCAR reanalysis (Kalnay et al., 1996) at the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) website. These datasets are available with 6
h interval from 1948 until the present, linearly interpolated in space and time, from the global
T62 Gaussian grid with 192x94 points (1.875 x 1.875) for the wind fields and from the 144x73
global grid (2.5 x 2.5) for the pressure, to the finite element mesh. The closest grid point with
data to the Areosa weather station and thus the point of interest is located at 42.5N and 10 W
(350E as should be read from the .nc file with the data). This point will be used in the
forthcoming comparisons.
The sea level atmospheric pressure data was also obtained from the European Centre for
Medium-range Weather Forecast (ECMWF) website (Uppala et al., 2005). From this source, the
st st
data is available in the period 1 September 1957 till 31 August 2002 also with a 6 h interval.
This information is also discretized in a grid of 2.5 by 2.5 and the point used is the same as for
the NOAA data.
The comparison between the IH, NOAA and ECMWF data is made for different periods. The
first period is the month of August 2002 since it is the only period for which there is information
from the three different sources. Considering the fact that only one month is a small period for a
sound assessment of the relationship and accuracy of these three sources, years 1987 and
1991 are analysed. The first was chosen considering that the storm event to be modelled took
place in this year. The year 1991 was chosen randomly to compare a little further NOAA and
ECMWF data.
51
In figure 5.1 it can be observed the data of atmospheric pressure at mean sea level from the
th
three different sources for August 2002. It should also be noted that the IH data only starts at 8
August 2002.
August 2002
1045
IH
Sea level atmospheric pressure (mb)
ECMWF
1035
NOAA
1025
1015
1005
1-8 4-8 7-8 10-8 13-8 16-8 19-8 22-8 25-8 28-8 31-8
Figure 5.1 Sea level atmospheric pressure from different sources for August 2002.
Observing figure 5.1 it is possible to identify a reasonable agreement between the NOAA and
th th th st
the ECMWF data for certain periods: 11 - 15 August and 24 - 31 August. For the second
period even though a difference exists, the trend is also verified in the IH data. The differences
are approximately constant and can be explained considering the fact the location is not the
same. It should be emphasized the significant and abrupt changes in the atmospheric pressure
in the IH data. This can be explained by the measuring device location being inland with
stronger temperature variations than in the ocean, and since the data is recorded and not
resulting from atmospheric circulation models there might be some equipment inadequate
calibration or malfunctioning.
Nonetheless, the difference between NOAA and ECMWF datasets should be stressed,
nd th th st
especially for the periods 2 -5 August and 16 - 21 August 2002, where the monotony of
each is opposite. For this it was found no explanatory reason. Considering the previous analysis
it is recommended that the above information should be used carefully and accordingly to the
purpose of the study.
In figure 5.2 the data of atmospheric pressure at mean sea level from NOAA and ECMWF for
th th
the year 1987 is shown, in figure 5.2 for October 1987 (the month of the 14 -16 storm) and in
figure 5.3 for the year 1991.
52
1987
1040
1030
1020
1010
1000
990
ECMWF NOAA
980
1-1 31-1 2-3 1-4 1-5 31-5 30-6 30-7 29-8 28-9 28-10 27-11 27-12
Figure 5.2 Comparison of sea level atmospheric pressure from NOAA and ECMWF for the year
1987.
1991
1040
1030
1020
1010
1000
990
980
ECMWF NOAA
970
1-1 31-1 2-3 1-4 1-5 31-5 30-6 30-7 29-8 28-9 28-10 27-11 27-12
Figure 5.3 Comparison of sea level atmospheric pressure from NOAA and ECMWF for the year
1991.
Analyzing figures 5.2 and 5.3 a clear difference between the NOAA and the ECMWF data can
be seen in January (1987 and 1991). For this difference, model input data issues are thought to
be the most likely reason. This difference is not considered as significant for the rest of the year
as can be concluded from the statistical analysis presented in table 5.1. For practical purposes,
data can be considered as the same for the rest of year. A maximum absolute difference of 3.94
53
mb (approximately 0.4%) and mean difference of 0.19 and 0.11 mb (approximately 0.02%),
respectively exists for 1987 and 1991.
Table 5.1 Statistical analysis of the comparison between sea level atmospheric pressure from
NOAA and ECMWF for the years 1987 and 1991
1987 1991
All year 23/01-31/12 All year 23/01-31/12
Mean difference (mb) -0.20 0.19 0.23 0.11
Standard deviation (mb) 4.56 0.59 2.04 0.59
Maximum difference (mb) 30.81 3.94 18.55 2.61
Minimum difference (mb) -34.64 -2.01 -15.90 -1.91
R2 0.699 0.994 0.923 0.993
October 1987
1030
1020
1010
1000
990
ECMWF NOAA
980
1-10 5-10 9-10 13-10 17-10 21-10 25-10 29-10
Figure 5.4 Comparison of sea level atmospheric pressure from NOAA and ECMWF for October
1987.
In figure 5.4 it is possible to see that the NOAA presented a lower atmospheric pressure for the
minimum of the storm. Considering this fact the data provided by NOAA will originate a higher
storm surge elevation component due to the atmospheric pressure. Wind data must also be
compared even though the expected differences are on the same order of magnitude and
coherent with the sea level atmospheric pressure.
It should also be mentioned that the statistics for the first month of each year do not differ
significantly from not considering it. Considering the difference only in the beginning of the year
it might be concluded that an unknown factor is causing the data record to be incoherent.
54
Further research might shed some light on the potential causes of this phenomenon. This is
strongly recommended if the simulation period includes the first month of the year.
5.2 Viana do Castelo tidal gauge record

In this section the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge record is analysed. This analysis consists of
separating the astronomic and the meteorological components to obtain the astronomical
harmonic constituents and the residuals. The harmonic constituents will be used as part of the
calibration process and the residuals will be used to validate the model and assess its skill.
This analysis will be focused in the year 1987 considering the major storm that hit the
th th
Portuguese coast in 14 -16 October 1987 period. It will also be analysed the year 1999 since
the tidal record is complete for this period. In 1987 the recorded hourly information is for the
th rd
period 4 April - 3 December.
Based on previous projects and experience in using the T-Tide software for this type of
assessment, (Arajo et al., 2011), this software was chosen as the tool to separate the
astronomical part and the residuals of the tidal record and to determine the harmonic
components for the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge. Other tidal gauges are considered indirectly,
in a later stage, relying in the published IH tide tables, where the phase and amplitude of the
four most important tidal constituents M2, S2, K1 and O1 can be seen. Since the present study
is focused on Lima estuary, this fact does not constitute a severe constraint but it might be
important in further studies, especially if the residuals are needed and a similar modelling
process is performed for other places in the Portuguese coast.
5.2.1 Separation of the astronomical and the meteorological part of the record
The Viana do Castelo tidal gauge record is analysed for the years 1987 and 1999. This record
was obtained from the IH and is available from 1978 to 2009.
The T_TIDE software package was used to separate both the deterministic and the
meteorological part of the tidal record. In the software the time series were inserted and a
measure of the relevance of the harmonic components to consider in the hindcast of the record
set (SNR). The value attributed to this parameter was assessed in order to achieve a
reasonable number of constituents.
The statistical values of the SNR analysis are presented in table 5.2 and the obtained values
are shown in figures 5.5, 5.6 and 5.7. From table 5.2 it can be seen that, when considering
small values of the SNR parameter, the mean value is much larger (one order of magnitude)
than if a larger value is taken. This is in agreement with what was expected since for small SNR
values the allowed error is larger. Nonetheless, the translation factor is the same for all the
significances and is equal to 219 cm.
55
Table 5.2 Different statistical parameters for different Signal to Noise-power Ratio (SNR)
SNR 0.0 1.0 18.0 100.0 500.0
Mean (cm) 0,370 0,480 -0.049 -0,049 -0,047
X0 (cm) 219 219 219 219 219
Number of components 59 37 13 8 6
60.0
Water surface elevation (cm)
30.0
0.0
-30.0
-60.0
59 13 6
-90.0
13-10 12:00 14-10 12:00 15-10 12:00 16-10 12:00 17-10 12:00
Figure 5.5 Observed astronomic tidal level after T_TIDE software package analysis for a different
th th
number of tidal harmonic constituents in the 13 17 October 1987 period.
12
8
Difference (cm)
-4
-8
-12
10-10 11-10 12-10 13-10 14-10 15-10 16-10 17-10 18-10 19-10 20-10
Figure 5.6 Difference between the observed tidal level considering 6 or 13 tidal constituents for
th th
the period 10 - 20 October 1987.
56
Analysing figure 5.6 and 5.7 it becomes clear that considering a different number of tidal
constituents while using the T_TIDE software package yields significant differences in the
results. This fact must be taken into account when assessing the surge heights since spurious
oscillations which appear in the time series might skew the results and can be easily avoided by
considering an adequate number of harmonic tidal constituents. This effect is more significant
when the tidal constituents, which are not considered, have significantly larger amplitudes. It
can be clearly noticed that considering a different number of tidal harmonic constituents leaves
harmonic fluctuations in the residuals.
80
60
Surge height (cm)
40
20
59 13 6
-20
13-10 12:00 14-10 12:00 15-10 12:00 16-10 12:00 17-10 12:00
Figure 5.7 Observed meteorological residuals after T_TIDE software package analysis for
h th
different SNR values in the period 13 -17 October 1987.
Considering the incomplete yearly record of 1987, additional analysis is conducted for the year
1999.This analysis is intended to obtain the tidal constituents amplitudes and phases. For
comparison, the values of the significance level will be such that the number of used
constituents is the same. In table 5.3 the results from this comparison are presented.
Table 5.3 Tidal constituents amplitude and phase obtained with T-tide analysis for years 1987
and 1999 and from the IH tide table
Constituents 1987 1999 IH tide table
Amplitude (cm) Phase () Amplitude (cm) Phase () Amplitude (cm) Phase ()
K1 7.2 76.3 7.1 61.6 7.1 61.3
K2 9.9 131.7 10.2 102.8 n.a. n.a.
M2 102.9 104.4 104.3 75.6 104.4 75.9
N2 22.2 86.2 22.3 57.1 n.a. n.a.
O1 6.3 333.7 6.5 316.3 6.2 319.0
S2 36.0 133.1 36.2 104.6 36.4 104.1
57
It should be noted that the tidal constituents amplitude and phases determined for the year
1999 are more accurate than for year 1987 since the yearly tidal record is complete for 1999.
Nonetheless, it is not possible to use it for the model calibration since the predicted time series
cannot be obtained without changing the start date of the tidal prediction, which is performed for
the storm period (year 1987). The comparison will instead be in the frequency domain in relation
to the IH tide prediction tables.
5.2.2 Time series stationarity assessment
Considering the modelling purpose of the present study, the time series stationarity analysis
was not considered as a primary goal. This was due to the fact that mean sea level changes
over a year are at least one order of magnitude smaller than the presented significant precision
in the simulations (cm). This precision is only increased for a finer statistical assessment
between different calibration scenarios and interesting if the state of the art evolution allows a
precision in the order of tenths of centimetres.
Nonetheless, the assessment of this stationarity for tidal gauges with sufficient data length is
recommended because it can play a role in the definition of a flooding risk chart with
probabilities corresponding to recurrence periods on the order of decades. This might be
accomplished by assuming linearity between the sea level rise and the astronomical plus
meteorological predicted sea level.
58
6 Storm surge modelling for the oceanic domain
6.1 Introduction
th th
In this chapter the storm surge event of 14 16 October 1987 is modelled. For this purpose
several aspects must be accounted and the model exploited. First, the model setup is described
and calibrated for the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge. After, the model is validated by comparing
the harmonic constituents obtained from a 90 days analysis for other tidal gauges and the mesh
convergence is analysed. Once the model is calibrated and validated, and before the storm
surge modelling process was performed, another analysis was made which consisted in
comparing the results to two different meshes, analyse the effect of considering a different
number of tidal constituents and considering a variable Coriolis option instead of the default
constant value.
6.2 Model setup

In this section the model setup is described in detail and the different stages involved are
discussed. Firstly, the coordinate system in the SMS was set as WGS84, the same as the
bathymetric scatter set. And further details are presented in table 6.1. After this, a domain was
defined which consists of oceanic and mainland boundaries. The boundaries of the present
model are the meridians 8W and 34W and the 36.5N latitude line and parallel 48N. Where
the meridian 8W intersects land the boundary is changed and materialized by the 4m
bathymetric depth contour. This depth contour was chosen to avoid using the wet and dry
option in this initial stage of the project. This is considered conservative since the tidal amplitude
for this region is smaller than 4 m.
Table 6.1 Project coordinates used during the modelling sequence

Project coordinates Mesh generation and data management Model simulations
Projection UTM Geographic (Latitude/Longitude)
Datum WGS84 WGS84
Planar Units Meters Arc Degrees
Zone 29.0 (12W - 6W Northern Hemisphere) -
Once these boundaries were defined a mesh had to be generated. Among the different mesh
generation methods in the SMS mesh toolbox, the SPD technique was chosen. After the mesh
was generated, boundary conditions were attributed being Mainland with the Natural (with
tangential slip) option, for the Iberian peninsula 4m bathymetry contour, and Ocean with Tidal
constituents option chosen for the oceanic boundary.
Considering previous simulations from Arajo et al. [2010(b)], it was chosen to start the
modelling using the 6 most significant components (M2, K1, K2, N2, O1 and S2) obtained from
the aforementioned T_TIDE software package analysis. The observed astronomic time series is
the T_TIDE output for a SNR of 500.
59
It should be noted that in this preliminary stage the mesh was generated based on the
bathymetry value and Courant number. This mesh, designated as M0 is presented in figure 6.1
and has 118656 elements and 60766 nodes. This mesh was the same as generated in
Mazzolari (2010) and designated as DTM01. It was created in the SMS interface based on the
M2 wave length and corresponding celerity. Not only was this fact considered but also the
maximum and minimum size of the elements. These boundaries were defined based upon the
previous experience from the author in generating quality meshes.
Figure 6.1 Mesh M0 (based on DTM01), domain used in the simulations, mesh detail near the
Viana do Castelo tidal gauge and the location of the Viana do Castelo reference station.
For this domain, bathymetry was acquired from different sources. From the coastline up to a
depth of 4000 m nautical Portuguese charts scaled 1:150 000 and 1:1 000 000 were digitalized.
For the rest of the domain the Global seafloor database from the Institute of Geophysics and
Planetary Physics (Smith and Sandwell, 1997) was considered. It should be mentioned that the
bottom bathymetry for deep water was obtained from the world database of the Institute of
Geophysics and Planetary Physics with a grid resolution of 1 minute (Smith and Sandwell,
1997).
The simulations were performed using the model type option 2DDI with the cold start option
checked. The Coriolis option kept with the constant default value of 0.0001 corresponding to the
project latitudes (~43.2N North of Viana do Castelo and corresponding to the storm generation
area). Finite amplitude, advective and time derivative terms are used with a wave continuity of
60
0.0000 and a lateral viscosity of 20.0. The bottom stress/friction formulation coefficient was
0.02. These parameters were set since the recommended by Arajo et al. [2010(a)] led to
unstable simulations for the used mesh. The tangential flow minimum angle was kept with the
default value of 90 and the solver type as iterative JCG. The absolute convergence criterion
was 0.00001 and the maximum number of iterations per time step was 50.
After the numerical parameters were defined it was necessary to set the time control
parameters for the simulation. This was done by defining a ramp function value of 2 days and
the start day coinciding with the defined when extracting the tidal potential and forcing
constituents. A run time of 10 days and a time step of 30 s were set, and the wave equation
time weighting factors default values were maintained. The ramp function values and the time
step were set as recommended in Arajo et al. [2010(a)].
It should be noted that these conditions were found to correspond to the best initial tested
conditions. The mesh considered corresponds to the best mesh used, the ramp value was not
found to be affecting the results when set as one and three days, the friction formulation were
kept as quadratic, from the work of Arajo et al. [2010(a)], and the total duration only affects the
period for which the results are needed, thus not having any impact on the measured water
levels after the ramp period.
For the analysis of the results obtained during the simulation it was necessary to define the
intended output files. Considering the calibration phase of the present project it was chosen to
obtain a global elevation time series and the elevation time series for recording stations. In the
global elevation file the water level in the mesh nodes were stored for the entire domain and
with the desired time interval set as 60 minutes. In the elevation time series file, the water level
elevation was recorded for the Viana do Castelo reference station also for an interval set as 60
minutes. It must be mentioned that even though not located at the same coordinates of the
Viana do Castelo tidal gauge the reference station was placed at the closest mesh node with a
similar water depth.
The location of the recording station which will represent the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge was
chosen in the grid point with coordinates closest to the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge. The
mentioned node has coordinates 8.855860W and 41.680136N.
In this initial phase of the simulation process the tidal constituents to be used were K1, K2, M2,
th
N2, O1 and S2 and were obtained for the 10 October 1987 00h00min from the Le Provost
database. These were obtained to simulate the astronomical tide by extracting each of the
constituents amplitude, frequency, nodal factor, equilibrium amplitude and earth reduction
factor. The options to use the forcing constituents and potential constituents were both checked.
The forcing constituents are applied at the mesh boundary nodes whereas the potential
constituents are applied to the whole domain.
In this calibration process the meteorological forcing was not considered. The wind speed and
sea level pressure will be set at a later stage of the simulation sequence for the simulation of
the storm event.
61
6.3 Model calibration
After the model is created and the different options selected it must be calibrated. This
calibration will be sequential and done by changing several parameters according to the
obtained fit of the simulated values to the observed record. The parameters are changed one at
a time and in the following order: quadratic friction coefficient value, wave continuity and lateral
viscosity. These parameters are changed within a certain interval considered as adequate and
the best value was chosen.
It must be stressed that the chosen sequence is not unique, might not be the best or leading
without any uncertainty to the best possible model calibration. Since this process theoretically
can be infinite in the number of hypothesis or at least extremely lengthy, it was chosen as a
calibration process with good characteristics and expected duration. The interval for which each
parameter value can be changed during the calibration process was intuitively set and
confirmed by the results. The interval between tested values for a certain parameter can be
reduced but an over extensive calibration process should be avoided.
6.3.1 Initial scenario (SCN_0)
The model setup defined previously was used as the initial scenario SCN_0 to calibrate the
model. These parameters are resumed in table 6.2 and some of these values were successively
modified to achieve better results in the following subsections. The mesh M0 is used during the
whole calibration procedure.
The calibration process will be based in the obtained time series from T_TIDE analysis for 1987
with 6 harmonic constituents: K1, K2, M2, N2, O1, S2 representing the observed values.
Table 6.2 Model input parameters for the SCN_0 scenario
Parameter Value
Mesh M0
Coriolis Constant = 0.0001
Friction coefficient Constant quadratic and 0.02
Time step 30 seconds
Wave continuity 0.0000
Lateral viscosity 20.0
Ramp period 2.0
Run time 10.0 days
Mainland Boundary Condition Natural
After the model was run the obtained results are compared with the recorded data and
presented in figure 6.2. In table 6.3 the statistical analysis, which will be used as a reference for
the rest of the calibration process, is presented.
62
With the initial model parameter values the obtained values are considered to be already
reasonable, showing a maximum difference between the two time series of approximately 7.5
cm and an accuracy of approximately 2.5 cm.
90.0
60.0
30.0
0.0
-30.0
-60.0
Observed values SCN_0
-90.0
13-10 14-10 15-10 16-10 17-10 18-10
th th
Figure 6.2 Observed and modelled water surface elevation during the 13 -18 October 1987
period.
Table 6.3 Statistical analysis for the SCN_0 scenario
Indicator Value
Bias (cm) -0.019
Accuracy (cm) 2.538
Skill 0.9956
Maximum difference (cm) 6.478
Minimum difference (cm) -7.470
Standard deviation (cm) 3.107
RMSE (cm) 3.099
6.3.2 Friction coefficient
In this and the following subsections, the parameters set in the scenario SCN_0 were used and
further calibration is done. For the tuning of the model, the mesh, friction formulation, ramp
value and total duration of the simulation were not changed and were kept as in SCN_0. In this
section the value of the friction coefficient is changed in order to fine tune this parameter without
changing the others. The different considered scenarios and the corresponding values are
presented in table 6.4.
63
Table 6.4 Different scenarios considered
Name Friction coefficient Wave continuity Lateral viscosity
SCN_0* 0.020 0.0000 20.0
SCN_FC_5 0.005 0.0000 20.0
SCN_FC_10 0.010 0.0000 20.0
SCN_FC_50 0.050 0.0000 20.0
SCN_FC_100 0.100 0.0000 20.0
SCN_FC_200 0.200 0.0000 20.0
SCN_FC_300** 0.300 0.0000 20.0
*Initial scenario; **Chosen scenario
Using the different friction coefficient values the model was run for each of them and the
obtained results are presented in figure 6.3. In this figure it was opted to only present the
observed values, the initial scenario (SCN_0) and the results for the best friction coefficient.
This was decided in order to make the figures coherent and still readable, while still showing the
most important results. A comparison of the differences between the observed values, initial
scenario and the different friction coefficient is presented in figure 6.4 and table 6.5.
90.0 Observed values SCN_0 SCN_FC_300
60.0
Water surface elevation (m)
30.0
0.0
-30.0
-60.0
-90.0
13-10 14-10 15-10 16-10 17-10 18-10
Figure 6.3 Tidal prediction using T-Tide and the comparison with different friction coefficients for
th th
the period 13 -18 October 1987.
64
7.0 SCN_0 SCN_FC_10 SCN_FC_100 SCN_FC_300
5.0
3.0
Differences (cm)
1.0
-1.0
-3.0
-5.0
-7.0
14-10 00:00 14-10 12:00 15-10 00:00 15-10 12:00 16-10 00:00
Figure 6.4 Differences between the observed and the ADCIRC model output for different bottom
friction coefficients.
Table 6.5 Statistical analysis for different friction values coefficients
Indicator SCN_0* SCN_FC10 SCN_FC50 SCN_FC100 SCN_FC200 SCN_FC300**
Bias (cm) -0.019 -0.048 0.009 0.021 0.032 0.038
Accuracy (cm) 2.538 2.636 2.384 2.247 2.101 2.040
Skill 0.9956 0.9953 0.9961 0.9966 0.9972 0.9974
Maximum difference (cm) 6.478 7.054 5.704 5.421 4.889 4.670
Minimum difference (cm) -7.470 -7.642 -6.828 -6.074 -5.374 -5.026
Standard deviation (cm) 3.107 3.215 2.914 2.709 2.487 2.395
RMSE (cm) 3.099 3.207 2.906 2.702 2.480 2.389
Analysing the obtained results it can be concluded that while holding the other parameters
constant and increasing the friction coefficient the model results are closer to the observed.
Even though the calibration of the friction coefficient could be continued for larger values it was
chosen to stop at a friction coefficient of 0.30 since, considering the values recommended in the
literature, it already represents a value two orders of magnitude larger.
A value of 0.30 for the friction coefficient is therefore considered since it allows a significant
improvement in all the statistical parameters except the bias. This fact is not considered as
relevant since the value of this parameter is in the order of 0.1 to 0.5 mm, so two orders of
magnitude smaller than the measuring precision. It should be noted that the achieved reduction
in the maximum and minimum absolute deviation from approximately 6.5 to 4.7 cm and -7.5 to -
65
5.0 cm, respectively, is very significant. The accuracy is improved by reducing its value from 2.5
cm to 2.0 cm (20% decrease).
6.3.3 Wave continuity
Once the friction coefficient is set and the lateral viscosity value is kept constant, the wave
continuity value is changed to follow the calibration process. The different scenarios and
corresponding values are presented in table 6.6.
Table 6.6 Scenarios considered in the wave continuity parameter calibration
SCN_FC_300* 0.300 0.0000 20.0
SCN_FC300_WC_05 0.300 0.0005 20.0
SCN_ FC300_WC_10** 0.300 0.0010 20.0
SCN_ FC300_WC_15 0.300 0.0015 20.0
For the scenarios presented in table 6.6 the model was run and the results can be observed in
figures 6.5 and 6.6.
Observed values SCN_FC_300 WC_10_fc_0.3

60.0
water surface elevation (cm)
40.0
20.0
0.0
-20.0
-40.0
-60.0
14-10 00:00 14-10 12:00 15-10 00:00 15-10 12:00 16-10 00:00
Figure 6.5 Computed and observed water surface elevation for different wave continuity factors
th th
in the period 14 16 October 1987.
66
5.0
SCN_FC_300 WC_05_fc_0.3 WC_10_fc_0.3
3.0
Differences (cm)
1.0
-1.0
-3.0
-5.0
14-10 00:00 14-10 12:00 15-10 00:00 15-10 12:00 16-10 00:00
th th
Figure 6.6 Computed differences for different wave continuity values in the period 14 16
October 1987.
From figures 6.5 and 6.6 it can be concluded that by changing the wave continuity value the
model predictive ability is enhanced. This can also be seen by analysing the statistical
indicators presented in table 6.7. Based on this it was decided to consider a wave continuity
parameter value of 0.0010. The decision is based in the accuracy, skill, standard deviation and
RMSE. An improvement of ~5% was obtained in the accuracy with respect to SCN_FC_300.
Table 6.7 Statistical analysis for different wave continuity coefficients
Indicator SCN_FC_300* SCN_FC300_WC_05 SCN_FC300_WC_10** SCN_FC300_WC_15
Bias (cm) 0.038 0.054 0.055 0.055
Accuracy (cm) 2.040 1.925 1.919 1.921
Skill 0.99738 0.99773 0.99773 0.99772
Maximum difference 4.670 4.284 4.298 4.378

(cm)
Minimum difference -5.026 -4.366 -4.576 -4.687

(cm)
Standard deviation (cm) 2.395 2.228 2.226 2.234
RMSE (cm) 2.389 2.223 2.221 2.228
67
6.3.4 Lateral viscosity
In this subsection both the friction coefficient value and the wave continuity were set according
to the previous subsections. Based upon scenario SCN_FC300_WC_10, four other scenarios
were determined for which the only change is the value of the Lateral Viscosity parameter.
2
The values were decided to range from 10.0 to 30.0 m /s with intervals of 5.0. These are
presented in table 6.8.
Table 6.8 Scenarios considered in the lateral viscosity parameter calibration
SCN_ FC300_WC_10* 0.300 0.0010 20.0
SCN_ FC300WC10_LT10 0.300 0.0010 10.0
SCN_ FC300WC10_LT15 0.300 0.0010 15.0
SCN_ FC300WC10_LT25 0.300 0.0010 25.0
SCN_ FC300WC10_LT30 0.300 0.0010 30.0
*Initial and chosen scenario
Figure 6.7 and table 6.9 show the obtained results of changing the Lateral viscosity value.
Considering the differences being smaller than the precision of this analysis the Lateral
viscosity is considered not relevant with respect to the results of the present simulation.
Observed values SCN_ FC300WC10_LT10

60.0
SCN_ FC300WC10_LT30 WC_10_fc_0.3
40.0
20.0
0.0
-20.0
-40.0
-60.0
14-10 00:00 14-10 12:00 15-10 00:00 15-10 12:00 16-10 00:00
Figure 6.7 Computed and observed water surface elevation for different lateral viscosity factors.
68
Table 6.9 Statistical analysis for different lateral viscosity coefficients
SCN SCN SCN SCN SCN

Scenario
WC10 WC10LT10 WC10LT15 WC10LT25 WC10LT30
Bias (cm) 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.055
Accuracy (cm) 1.919 1.919 1.919 1.919 1.919
Skill 0.997735 0.997735 0.997735 0.997735 0.997735
Maximum difference
4.298 4.298 4.298 4.298 4.298
(cm)
Minimum difference
-4.576 -4.576 -4.576 -4.576 -4.576
(cm)
Standard deviation (cm) 2.226 2.226 2.226 2.226 2.226
RMSE 2.2209 2.2210 2.2210 2.2209 2.2209
6.3.5 Boundary condition type assessment
The influence of the mainland boundary condition type on the model computed values is
assessed herein. This is done in order to determine whether the change of this type of boundary
allows improving the model outcome. The analysed types were Natural (the same as in the
former chapters), Essential and Essential with Tangential slip option checked.
The model set-up is the same as used in the calibration process scenario SCN_ FC300_WC_10
with the only change made being the Mainland boundary condition type from Natural to
Essential and Essential with Tangential slip option checked.
The results are presented in table 6.10 and figure 6.8. Considering the extremely small
differences, it was chosen to only represent the differences instead of the four time series with
the modelled results and the observed values.
Table 6.10 Statistical analysis for different mainland boundary condition types
Natural-Essential Essential-Essential with slip Natural-Essential with slip

Parameter
(Nat-Essen) (Ess-Ess_with) (Nat-Ess_with)
Bias (cm) 0.00001 -0.00001 0.00000
Absolute bias (cm) 0.00064 0.00060 0.00007
Minimum difference (cm) -0.00285 -0.00226 -0.00030
RMSE (cm) 0.00094 0.00089 0.00011
69
0.003
Nat-Essen Ess-Ess_with Nat-Ess_with
0.002
0.001
Differences (cm)
0.000
-0.001
-0.002
-0.003
10-10 11-10 12-10 13-10 14-10 15-10 16-10 17-10 18-10 19-10 20-10
Figure 6.8 Comparison between the default mainland boundary condition and essential (with and
without slip).
Analysing these it is possible to conclude that, for the present tidal gauge location, the influence
of the type of Mainland condition considered is not significant, only in the order of the
thousandths of centimetres. However, there is a difference one order of magnitude smaller
between the Natural and the Essential with slip condition than when considering the absence
of slip. This is in agreement with what was expected since the model setting is similar for the
essential boundary condition, as mentioned in subsection 4.1.4.
It should also be noted that the largest differences were for the periods with largest tidal
amplitude as expected. The influence of this type of condition might be expected to be relevant
in shallower areas where velocities are higher. Considering the fact that the present coast is an
open coast the water depth and the tidal character (mesotidal) leads to small velocities the
previous analysis is robust and logical.
6.3.6 Final calibration
The comparison between the observed astronomic tide and the initial and the final scenarios is
presented in figures 6.9, 6.10 and 6.11. From these figures it is possible to see a significant
improvement in the model, both from amplitude and phase point of view. This improvement can
be seen clearly in figure 6.11. In table 6.11 the calibration procedure is analyzed and the results
commented.
The accuracy, standard deviation and RMSE show an improvement on the order of 20%,
nonetheless the biggest improvements are observed in the maximum and minimum differences:
more than 30%. The model skill, already having an extremely high value is not significantly
improved.
70
Summarizing, a maximum difference between observed and modelled water surface elevations
of 4.5 cm is not considered as significant since it is approximately two orders of magnitude
smaller than the tidal amplitude.
120.0 Observed values Initial scenario SCN_0 Final Scenario
80.0
40.0
0.0
-40.0
-80.0
-120.0
12-10 13-10 14-10 15-10 16-10 17-10 18-10 19-10 20-10
Figure 6.9 Comparison between observed values, initial and final calibration parameters ADCIRC
output.
80.0
Observed values Initial scenario SCN_0 Final Scenario
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
-20.0
-40.0
-60.0
14-10 00:00 14-10 06:00 14-10 12:00 14-10 18:00 15-10 00:00
th
Figure 6.10 Water surface elevation in the 14 October 1987, both observed and modelled in the
initial and final scenario.
It should be noted in table 6.11 that while the other parameters show a significant difference
(~24 to 39%), the skill parameter being already extremely high prior to the calibration show a
difference of only 0.2%. nonetheless this parameter was chosen to be present in this table since
it is the only dimensionless parameter.
71
8.0 Initial differences Final Differences
6.0
Differences (cm)
4.0
2.0
0.0
-2.0
-4.0
-6.0
-8.0
12-10 13-10 14-10 15-10 16-10 17-10 18-10 19-10 20-10
Figure 6.11 Differences between the ADCIRC initial and final calibration parameters output and
the observed values.
Table 6.11 Comparison of the initial and final calibration statistical parameters
Indicator Initial Final Comments
Bias (cm) -0.019 0.055 Not significant
Accuracy (cm)* 2.538 1.919 24.4 %
Skill* 0.9956 0.9977 -0.2 %
Maximum difference (cm)* 6.478 4.298 33.7 %
Minimum difference (cm)* -7.470 -4.576 38.7 %
Standard deviation (cm)* 3.107 2.226 28.4 %
RMSE (cm)* 3.099 2.221 28.3 %
*Improvement percentage
6.4 Model validation

In this section the model is validated for the best calibration scenario by refining the mesh and
performing a harmonic analysis.
6.4.1 Convergence analysis
In this subsection the mesh M0 is refined to assess the influence of a finer mesh in the model
output. For this purpose, the mesh M0 is refined using the standard SMS elements refining
option (regular subdivision) to generate the M0R mesh presented in figure 6.12. This analysis is
made considering the relevance of assessing whether the used mesh is already convergent or if
there are errors caused by the spatial discretization being too coarse (Blain et al., 1998).
The time step influence was also assessed since it can play a major role in model instabilities
due to the CFL condition as mentioned previously in subsection 4.1.3.
72
Figure 6.12 Mesh M0R resulting from a single two-fold refinement of the M0 mesh. The M0R mesh
has 474624 (118656) elements and 240187 (60766) nodes (comparison to mesh M0).
The obtained results can be seen in figure 6.13 and table 6.12. Analysing this information it can
be seen that a reasonable convergence is achieved. This should not be overestimated since not
only the mesh or the time step might be biasing the results but more likely the bathymetry
interpolation. Also according to the obtained results the mesh M0R computational expense is
(R) TM
not acceptable (difference between approximately 9 hours and 2 hours using an Intel Core
i5 CPU M430 2.27 GHz processor using only one core).
120.0 M0 (cm) M0R (cm) Diferences (cm)
80.0
40.0
0.0
-40.0
-80.0
-120.0
10-10 12-10 14-10 16-10 18-10 20-10
Figure 6.13 Computed values for the M0 and the M0R mesh and respective differences at the
Viana do Castelo tidal gauge.
Table 6.12 Statistical indicators comparing the M0 and M0R mesh model output
Indicator Value
Mean (cm) 0.004
Standard deviation (cm) 0.562
Maximum difference (cm) 1.135
Minimum difference (cm) -1.060
73
6.4.2 Harmonic analysis
In this subsection the previous mesh is used to conduct a harmonic analysis which is intended
to validate the model based on a frequency instead of time domain assessment. The advantage
of this type of analysis is the fact of allowing the comparison of the model output not only to the
observed values but also to the published tidal harmonic constituents in the IH tide table.
For this analysis the model setup is the same as used in the calibration process final scenario
(SCN_ FC300_WC_10) with an extension of the simulation duration from 10 to 90 days. The
frequency analysis is obtained using the corresponding ADCIRC option checked and observing
the corresponding output file.
The locations of the 8 tidal gauges considered: Viana do Castelo, Leixes, Aveiro, Figueira da
Foz, Peniche, Cascais, Sines and Lagos are presented in figure 6.14. In appendix B tables B.1
to B.4, the obtained results for the tidal harmonic constituents M2, S2, K1 and O1 for all the tidal
gauges (except Viana do Castelo) are presented. For the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge a more
detailed analysis is performed and presented in tables 6.13 and 6.14.
Figure 6.14 Location of the 8 tidal gauge stations considered in the harmonic analysis using
mesh M0.
Analysing tables 6.13 and 6.14, it is possible to see a difference between the modelled values
and the observed/ published ranging from less than 1% to 9% in the amplitude of the M2 and
K1 components and from 1.0 to 7.1 (~0.33% to 2%) in the phase of the same components.
These differences are considered to be reasonable. Table 6.15 presents the results from the
analysis, analogous to the performed for the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge presented in table
6.14, resumed for the minimum and maximum difference of each of the four tidal constituents
for the other tidal gauges. It can be observed much larger differences for these tidal gauges
than for the Viana do Castelo, suggesting that another factor may be affecting the results. The
hypothesis is the Coriolis factor not being constant over the entire domain and, thus, it will be
assessed in the following section.
74
Table 6.13 Amplitude and phase of the main astronomical constituents at Viana do Castelo from
different sources
Tide table T_TIDE harmonic analysis ADCIRC harmonic

analysis
(year 1999)
(90 days)
Constituents Amplitude (cm) Phase () Amplitude (cm) Phase () Amplitude (cm) Phase ()
M2 104.4 75.9 104.3 75.6 105.2 76.9
S2 36.4 104.1 36.2 104.6 36.5 102.0
K1 7.1 61.3 7.1 61.6 6.5 63.9
O1 6.2 319.0 6.5 316.3 6.0 314.8
N2 n.a n.a 22.3 57.1 23.4 60.4
K2 n.a n.a 10.2 102.8 9.3 95.7
Table 6.14 Amplitude and phase differences between modelled and observed/ published for the
Viana do Castelo tidal gauge
Differences Tide table Differences T_TIDE (year 1999)
Constituents Amplitude (%) Phase () Amplitude (%) Phase ()
M2 -0.8 -1.0 -0.9 -1.3
S2 -0.3 2.1 -0.8 2.6
K1 8.5 -2.6 8.5 -2.3
O1 3.2 4.2 7.7 1.5
N2 n.a n.a -4.9 -3.3
K2 n.a n.a 8.8 7.1
Table 6.15 Maximum and minimum amplitude and phase differences between modelled and
published values for the other seven tidal gauges
Amplitude differences (%) Phase difference ()
Constituents Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum
M2 2.5 7.4 10.3 25.9
S2 0.8 7.2 7.8 18.9
K1 4.5 14.7 4.4 22.8
O1 0.0 6.5 0.5 2.5
75
6.5 Assessment of other aspects
6.5.1 Coriolis option assessment
Considering the domain size in which respect to latitude changes, the Coriolis factor, which was
used with the default constant value, is set as variable and its influence assessed. This option
was chosen since it might be relevant to assess the significance of considering a variable value
for a domain such as the simulated, with a difference in Latitudes between the Viana do Castelo
and Lagos tidal gauges of approximately 4 35 meaning a Coriolis factor (f) ranging from
-5 -5
approximately 5.8x10 to 6.5x10 (~10%).
In tables 6.16 to 6.23 the harmonic analysis for the tidal constituents present in the IH tide table
is presented. This analysis is made by comparing the amplitude and phase of the M2, S2, K1
and O1 harmonic constituents obtained in a simulation with a Coriolis factor of 0.0001 and
another with this coefficient defined as variable thus computed by ADCIRC as a function of
latitude.
Analysing the aforementioned tables, it is possible to conclude that, in general, considering a

variable Coriolis parameter provides much better results with respect to phase, without
compromising the amplitude accuracy. With respect to the amplitude accuracy in all cases
except for Aveiro the M2 amplitude is always more accurate for the variable Coriolis option. For
the other components this is not straightforward and oscillations can be observed.
In the following tables a positive comment means an improvement in the obtained values
whereas a negative means the computed values are worse than what was previously
obtained. A neutral comment means that no conclusion was drawn unambiguously and not
possible to assess where there was not sufficient data to compare.
Table 6.16 Amplitude and phase of the main astronomical constituents at Viana do Castelo from
different sources
Tide table Coriolis 0.0001 Coriolis Variable Analysis
Constituents Amplitude Phase Amplitude Phase Amplitude Phase Comparison Coriolis

(cm) () (cm) () (cm) () 0.0001 and variable
M2 104.4 75.9 105.2 76.9 105.8 77.1 Negative
S2 36.4 104.1 36.5 102.0 37.1 104.8 Neutral
K1 7.1 61.3 6.5 63.9 6.5 62.6 Positive
O1 6.2 319.0 6.0 314.8 6.1 317.5 Positive
N2 n.a n.a 23.4 60.4 23.2 58.5 Not possible to

assess
K2 n.a n.a 9.3 95.7 10.3 101.2 Not possible to

assess
76
Leixes tidal gauge

M2 104.4 76.1 100.0 64.6 105.9 77.3 Positive
S2 36.6 104.4 35.5 89.7 37.1 105.3 Positive
K1 7.0 60.2 6.3 55.2 6.4 62.7 Positive
O1 6.2 319.4 5.8 312.6 6.1 317.8 Positive
Table 6.18 Analysis of the importance of considering the Coriolis parameter as variable for Aveiro
tidal gauge

M2 96.8 78.8 101.9 70.3 105.5 76.0 Positive (phase)
S2 33.4 106.9 35.8 96.5 36.9 103.8 Positive (phase)
K1 5.9 61.6 6.3 58.9 6.4 62.1 Positive (phase)
O1 5.6 318.7 5.9 314.7 6.0 317.3 Positive (phase)
Figueira da Foz tidal gauge

M2 103.3 75.4 100.7 63.2 104.8 74.0 Positive
S2 36.1 104.1 35.8 88.0 36.7 101.3 Positive (phase)
K1 6.6 63.0 6.3 54.4 6.3 61.0 Positive (phase)
O1 6.1 319.4 5.9 311.5 6.0 316.4 Positive
Peniche tidal gauge

M2 103.0 69.8 105.6 77.0 101.5 70.5 Positive
S2 36.0 97.2 37.2 104.8 35.6 96.6 Positive
K1 7.5 55.6 6.4 61.7 6.3 59.6 Positive (Phase)
O1 6.2 315.6 6.0 317.3 5.9 315.0 Positive (Phase)
77
Cascais tidal gauge

M2 98.8 64.2 106.1 77.3 99.6 64.8 Positive
S2 35.0 90.6 37.2 105.2 35.3 89.8 Positive
K1 7.0 54.1 6.4 61.8 6.3 55.6 Positive
O1 6.0 314.5 6.0 317.6 5.8 312.7 Positive (Phase)
Table 6.22 Analysis of the importance of considering the Coriolis parameter as variable for Sines
tidal gauge

M2 98.5 63.3 105.8 76.0 100.2 63.4 Positive
S2 34.7 89.4 37.1 103.7 35.6 88.2 Positive
K1 7.0 54.5 6.3 61.3 6.2 54.7 Positive (Phase)
O1 6.2 312.7 6.0 317.1 5.9 311.6 Positive (Phase)
Table 6.23 Analysis of the importance of considering the Coriolis parameter as variable for Lagos
tidal gauge

M2 101.7 58.7 105.1 73.9 100.0 59.0 Positive
S2 36.6 85.1 36.9 101.2 35.8 83.0 Positive (Phase)
K1 7.1 49.1 6.3 60.3 6.1 50.8 Positive (Phase)
O1 6.1 309.4 6.0 316.2 5.9 309.3 Positive (Phase)
From table 6.16 to 6.23 it is possible to see a clearly improvement in the results by considering
a variable Coriolis factor. This difference is especially significant for the phase agreement.
6.5.2 Analysis of a different number of tidal constituents
In this subsection the influence of considering a different number of tidal constituents is

assessed. For this purpose the T_TIDE software package was used choosing SNR values such
that 6, 10 and 13 tidal constituents were obtained. After this, for 6 and 10 tidal constituents the
corresponding T_TIDE constituents were extracted from the Le Provost database and the
model run. For 13 tidal constituents, since there is no direct connection between both sources,
the same number of tidal constituents was chosen in the Le Provost database by considering
the T2 harmonic constituent instead of the M4. After these considerations, the difference in
78
predicted tidal levels between the modelled and the corresponding results from the T_TIDE
analysis (section 5.2) was assessed.
Observing the figures 6.15 to 6.18 it can be seen clearly a more significant influence for periods
with larger tidal amplitude spring tides. Which is expected since the phenomena amplitude is
stronger and thus the effects are expected to be enhanced. It should also be noted from table
6.24 and figure 6.15 a better model performance for 6 tidal constituents than for 13. This can be
explained since the T_TIDE analysis considers in the analysis the M 4 constituent whereas the
Le Provost database considers the T2 harmonic constituent. This difference was tried to surpass
by considering 12 tidal constituents but the analysis showed that the T_TIDE software package
could only provide 10 constituents. For 10 harmonic constituents the model output is considered
better than for 6 and 13 constituents since smaller differences can be achieved in the
differences between observer and hindcasted water surface elevations. Another aspect is the
fact of a larger part of the record being explained by the astronomy, thus reducing the diurnal
and semidiurnal oscillations in the residuals record.
80.0 Observed values (13 HC) Computed (13 HC)
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
-20.0
-40.0
-60.0
-80.0
14-10 00:00 15-10 00:00 16-10 00:00 17-10 00:00 18-10 00:00
th
Figure 6.15 Model output using 13 harmonic constituents and observed values for the period 14
th
- 18 October 1987.
80.0 Observed values (10 HC) Computed (10 HC)
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
-20.0
-40.0
-60.0
-80.0
14-10 00:00 15-10 00:00 16-10 00:00 17-10 00:00 18-10 00:00
th
Figure 6.16 Model output using 10 harmonic constituents and observed values for the period 14
th
- 18 October 1987.
79
8.0 13 harmonic constituents 6 harmonic constituents
6.0
Differences (cm)
4.0
2.0
0.0
-2.0
-4.0
-6.0
-8.0
12-10 13-10 14-10 15-10 16-10 17-10 18-10 19-10 20-10
Figure 6.17 Differences between computed and observed water surface elevations using 6 and all
the constituents from the Le Provost database.
8.0 10 harmonic constituents 6 harmonic constituents

6.0
Differences (cm)
4.0
2.0
0.0
-2.0
-4.0
-6.0
-8.0
12-10 13-10 14-10 15-10 16-10 17-10 18-10 19-10 20-10
Figure 6.18 Differences between computed and observed water surface elevations using 6 and 10
harmonic constituents.
Table 6.24 Statistical analysis of the differences between model and observations both using 6
and 13 tidal constituents.
Indicator 13 Harmonic constituents 10 Harmonic constituents 6 Harmonic constituents
Bias (cm) 0.043 0.071 0.055
Accuracy (cm) 2.971 1.714 1.919
Skill 0.9950 0.9981 0.9977
RMSE (cm) 3.476 2.059 2.221
80
6.5.3 Analysis of the influence of the domain size and mesh generation criteria
Herein the influence of considering a different domain and different mesh is analysed for the
same calibration parameters as previously determined. Even though changing the results the
friction coefficient parameters effect is assessed since the value obtained previously is
considered large when compared to the recommended in the literature.
Firstly a different domain is considered and two meshes are generated for the same domain.
These meshes are only generated based on the defined size function and the model is run to
assess how they perform. The obtained meshes are not subjected to post processing since one
of the objectives of this study is to assess size function generations that are effective in creating
a well graded mesh which does not require refinements or other fastidious operations by the
user. The two meshes used considered standard size functions operations with some intuition
and trial and error from the author in order to smooth the mesh and add local refinement to
improve the overall quality.
In the mesh generation process, attention is given to ensuring a reasonable number of nodes
and elements as well as sufficient detail where necessary. This is done in order to assure that
the computational effort is reasonable, but that spatial discretization accuracy is not sacrificed.
A mesh quality can be determined based in the analysis of several parameters. The
reproduction of contour lines, element area change, minimum and maximum interior angle as
well as the element density configuration can help assessing the mesh quality
The two meshes are presented in figures 6.19 and 6.20. The generation process and size
functions are described in detail in appendix E and general information presented in table 6.25.
Observing both meshes, it is possible to see a more abrupt element area change in several
places than in the mesh M0. This is even more noticeable in mesh M2, where close to the
Galicia sandbank and the continental shelf in the Bay of Biscay, the bathymetry gradient change
is very abrupt.
The two generated meshes have a domain limited by the parallels 37N and 48N as well as the
34W meridian. The eastern boundary is defined as the 4m bathymetry contour of the
Portuguese, Spanish and French West coast intersected with the boundary materialized y the
mentioned parallels.
81
Figure 6.19 Mesh M1 with 156348 nodes and 306022 elements.
Figure 6.20 Mesh M2 with 73101 nodes and 141652 elements.
Table 6.25 Generated mesh data
Name Criteria Number of nodes Number of elements Range
M1 Courant <0.9 156348 306022 308.9-74204.9m

Time step=30s
M2 Courant <0.9 73101 141652 411.9-98939.8m

Time step=60s
Figure 6.21 presents the water surface elevation for the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge in the
th th
period 13 17 October 1987 and figure 6.22 shows the differences between the initial
scenario and each of the two meshes generated subsequently obtained by running the model
with the three different spatial discretizations: mesh M0 (initial), M1 and M2. Since the tidal
wave propagates predominantly from South to North, the obtained results do not allow
assessing unequivocally whether the domain size affects or not the obtained results in the
Viana do Castelo tidal gauge in case of the storm surge with a path from WNW to SSE.
82
90.0 M0 M1 M2
60.0
30.0
0.0
-30.0
-60.0
-90.0
13-10 14-10 15-10 16-10 17-10
Figure 6.21 Comparison between different meshes for the same model parameters.
3.0
M0-M1 M0-M2
2.0
1.0
Differences (cm)
0.0
-1.0
-2.0
-3.0
-4.0
10-10 12-10 14-10 16-10 18-10 20-10
Figure 6.22 Comparison between different meshes for the same model parameters.
In table 6.26, the statistical analysis of the results presented in figure 6.22 is performed. The
meshes M1 and M2 have accuracy on the order of 1 mm and 3 mm for maximum and minimum
differences, which is not significant. A difference of 1 cm in average between M0 and M1 as well
as M0 and M2, on the contrary, should be noted and the difference must be further analysed.
Nonetheless, M2 presents a huge advantage with respect to M1 since a smaller number of
elements allows a computational time of one half in relation to the other.
Considering the obtained results and the smaller computational expense using mesh M0, this
th th
mesh is chosen to continue for the 14 16 October 1987 storm event modelling process.
83
Table 6.26 Statistical analysis for different meshes and same model parameters
Parameter M0-M1 M1-M2 M0-M2
Bias (cm) 0.009 -0.005 0.004
Accuracy (cm) 0.763 0.084 0.738
RMSE (cm) 1.018 0.107 0.995
6.6 The 14th -16th October 1987 storm modelling
6.6.1 Introduction
th th
In this section the storm which hit the Portuguese coast between the 14 and the 16 October
1987 is modelled. For this purpose the wind velocity fields and the sea level atmospheric
pressure are considered as the forcing agents. The wind data and the atmospheric pressure
was obtained from Kalnay et al. (1996) in the NOAA website, as courtesy of NOAA/ESRL
Physical Sciences Division. The atmospheric pressure values can be seen in section 5.1 and
figure 6.23 serves to illustrate the storm path, which initially is headed eastward and later to the
northeast.
(a) (b)
84
(c) (d)
(e) (f)
(g)
th
Figure 6.23 Sea level atmospheric pressure in Pascal for the studied domain for (a) 14 October
th th th
1987 00:00 UTM, (b) 14 October 1987 12:00 UTM, (c) 15 October 1987 00:00 UTM (d) 15 October
th th th
1987 06:00 UTM (e) 15 October 1987 12:00 UTM (f) 15 October 1987 18:00 UTM (g) 16 October
1987 00:00 UTM. (Kalnay et al., 1996. Courtesy of NOAA/ESRL Physical Sciences Division at
http://www.esrl.noaa .gov).
85
The storm surge magnitude can be first assessed for narrow continental shelves based upon
the barometric pressure effect as mentioned previously in section 3.3. This analysis is
emphasized again here, in figure 6.24, and it shows that NOAA data has a stronger agreement
with the observed residuals than ECMWF.
Analyzing figure 6.24 it is possible to see a good agreement in the water level changes due to
the inverted barometer effect and the observed residuals. This is in agreement with the present
in the literature (Taborda and Dias, 1992). It should be noted that data from NOAA predicts a
maximum inverted barometer effect of approximately 30 cm whereas the ECMWF
approximately 28 cm. It should also be mentioned that the coordinates of this point are not the
same as the tidal gauge, thus this must be used with caution.
100.0
Residuals (6 Harm Const) ECMWF NOAA
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
-20.0
10-10 12-10 14-10 16-10 18-10 20-10
Figure 6.24 Comparison between the water level changes due to the atmospheric pressure
th
variation from ECMWF and NOAA with the observed residuals considering 6 for the period 10
th
20 October 1987 in the closest point to the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge.
6.6.2 Model setup

th th
The model setup to simulate the storm event of the 14 -16 October 1987 considered the same
parameters obtained after the calibration performed in the previous chapter (section 6.3).
The datasets obtained from NOAA, mentioned in the previous section, were used in the
ADCIRC model as the forcing to obtain the meteorological residuals. Once the forcing was
inserted in the model, astronomical and meteorological forcing can be combined for different
scenarios. The scenarios considered consisted of only astronomy forcing, only meteorology
forcing and both jointly. This was defined in order to assess the interaction between the
astronomy and meteorology.
The meteorological forcing requires the wind speed and direction as well as the sea level
pressure for the period of the 1987 storm. In this subsection there is no calibration of the model
parameters analyzed previously, instead the model predictive skill is assessed using the
previous calibrated parameters.
86
th
In figure 6.25 the isobars and wind field, as inserted in the model, are presented for 15 October
1987 at 12:00 UTM. It can be seen clearly the low pressure system located NW of the Iberian
Peninsula and strong wind blowing from SSW. This time frame was chosen since it is when the
peak values of the atmospheric pressure and wind intensity were observed.
th
Figure 6.25 Isobars and wind field as considered in the storm surge modelling on 15 October
1987 12:00 UTM.
6.6.3 Pressure and wind influence
In this subsection the effect of the wind in the storm surge in relation to the atmospheric
pressure is assessed. In figure 6.26 the computed surge is compared to the expected inverted
barometer effect with data from NOAA.
Observing figure 6.26, it is possible to conclude that the wind effect is significantly smaller than
the inverted barometer effect by approximately one order of magnitude. Nevertheless, it can be
seen that the maximum surge peak is higher and occurs earlier than the peak of the
atmospheric pressure surge.
100.0
Computed surge
80.0 Residuals (6 Harmonic Constituents)

Expected inverted barometer effect
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
-20.0
13-10-87 14-10-87 15-10-87 16-10-87 17-10-87 18-10-87
Figure 6.26 Computed storm surge (with pressure and wind) and the expected inverted barometer
th th
effect surge in the 13 18 October 1987 period.
87
6.6.4 Assessment of astronomy and meteorology forcing interaction
In this subsection, the character of the interaction between the astronomical and meteorological
forcing is assessed. This is of the utmost importance since one should know if, for the studied
region, it is possible to separate the modelling of the two processes. In case this interaction is
observed for the storm surge assessment it will be necessary to run for both forcing
mechanisms jointly.
In figure 6.27 it can be seen that the storm surge event maximum height is better reproduced
when considering both phenomena coupled. Nonetheless, it should be mentioned a strong
underprediction during low tide period for both types of simulation. This is more evident when
both astronomy and meteorology are considered together.
Observing figure 6.27, it is also possible to see a clear difference between considering the
astronomy and meteorological forcing separately or jointly. This is in agreement with the
previous work of Arajo et al. (2011) and it can be explained by nonlinear interactions between
the two phenomena. The model boundary conditions, which are not set rigorously the same due
to the model restrictions, might also be contributing to the obtained results. For the meteorology
alone, the oceanic boundary is considered as an inverted barometer boundary, whereas when
both are coupled the boundary can only be defined as forced by the astronomy, instead of the
ideal scenario of considering both the astronomical effects and the inverted barometer
simultaneously.
This analysis was extended for the rest of the tidal gauges along the Portuguese coast and the
same phenomena were observed, thus indicating that storm surge modelling along the
Portuguese coast should account for non-linear effects to better reproduce the high water peaks
during the storm event.
350.0
Water elevation referred to the local datum
300.0
250.0
(cm)
200.0
150.0
Observed Astronomy jointly meteorology Astronomy plus meteorology

100.0
12-10 13-10 14-10 15-10 16-10 17-10 18-10
Figure 6.27 Computed time series for the astronomical and meteorological forcing: jointly and
added up compared with the observed water surface elevation at the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge
th th
in the period 12 18 October 1987.
88
7 Storm surge modelling for the Lima estuary
7.1 Introduction
In this chapter the main purpose of the present dissertation is unveiled. In the previous chapters
some considerations and input datasets needed for this chapter were presented. These
consisted in calibrating the model parameters, assessing the effect of considering only
meteorology, astronomy or both jointly, evaluating the effect of the wind versus the atmospheric
pressure and building a DTM for the Lima estuary.
Bearing in mind the fact that most problems when applying the wet/drying algorithm, which
might appear due to numerical convergence, are likely to occur only inside the estuary, the
model domain was changed to focus on the Lima estuary area. This was performed to reduce
the computational expense and to allow a more effective parameter calibration inside the
estuary. In future works, this might constitute a starting point to the definition of two different
model areas one with the parameters used in the oceanic domain and other in the Lima estuary
area.
In figure 7.1 it can be seen an aerial view of the Lima estuary mudflat area. Among several
aspects it should be noted the complex channel configuration, with some channels width
ranging from a few meters to about 300 m. If the narrower channels were to be modelled, an
excessive mesh density agreeing with the size of these channels had to be considered.
Nevertheless, this is not reasonable due the tiny elements which would have appeared with the
subsequent effects in numerical stability and increased computational expense. In order to
avoid this, the most important channels were indentified and a minimum mesh size defined such
that sufficient detail, for the natural flow not to be affected, is garanteed.
In order to perform adequate numerical simulations at the tidal flats areas the wet and dry
process of some parts of the domain must be deemed. This phenomenon assumes a significant
relevance in these areas since cyclically some parts become wet and dry. To account for this
process the wetting /drying algorithm, which was developed by Luettich and Westerink (1995),
is used. This algorithm was defined in such a way that during simulations some elements are
allowed to become wet or dry and the mesh boundary adjusted accordingly.
The wetting/ drying algorithm allows solving the hydrodynamic equations in these areas without
turning the model unstable, which would occur otherwise due to the absence of water on certain
elements. For an element to become wet a water column height is defined in such a way that
the required water depth is neither excessively high nor low. The time for this process to occur
must also be set by defining a certain number of time steps. This is intended to account for the
real physical process, where it is required a certain amount of time for an area to turn from moist
to wet (from having some pores filled to have a water slide covering the surface) and vice versa.
89
th
Figure 7.1 Lima river mudflats, as obtained from Google Earth in 18 July 2010, showing the
complex channel configuration. This image was probably obtained during a low tide when most of
the tidal flats were emerged.
7.2 Model setup
7.2.1 General considerations
In this section the model setup used to simulate the storm hydrodynamics inside the Lima
estuary will be described. At this stage, a smaller domain, which will comprise the estuary tidal
flats and the wetting drying algorithm, is considered. While setting up the model, mudflats were
included and complex features such as bridge columns and breakwaters avoided. The ocean
boundary was created considering an arc of circumference with a radius of approximately 8 km
and forced considering the 10 tidal components (M2, S2, K1, K2, N2, O1, Q1, P1, NU2 and
MU2) used in the previous chapter in subsection 6.5.2.
In figure 7.2 it can be seen the mesh used to simulate the estuarine water circulation. This mesh
has 29290 elements and 15102 nodes; the minimum bathymetry value is -5.00 m and the
maximum 55.66 m. This mesh was generated based on a size function ranging from 30.0 to
324.1 m, in such a way that the main channels existing in the Lima estuary are considered. To
verify this, runs had to be performed and the results explored to assess its suitability to
reproduce the estuarine hydrodynamics. The ortophotomaps are also presented in figure 7.2, as
background, in order to allow an easy identification of the channel locations. In table 7.1 it is
presented the coordinates of the three points considered by Hidrodata staff (2006) which will be
used during the model calibration. Reference stations 1 and 2 represent the Viana do Castelo
tidal gauge as used in the previous chapter and in this chapter, respectively. These two points
do not match since reference station 1 is the closest point to the real location of the Viana do
Castelo tidal gauge which could be considered for the oceanic domain. For the estuarine
90
domain, the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge real location is used and considered as reference
station 2. To account for the wet and dry of the tidal flats, the wetting/ drying option was
checked. Several parameters, which are presented in table 7.2, can be defined. Considering the
purpose of this part of the work the default values were not changed.
4
3 5
2
1
Figure 7.2 Mesh M_EST used to model the Lima estuary and location of the five considered
reference stations. From West to East: Viana do Castelo tidal gauge as considered in the chapter 6
(reference station 1), the real location of this tidal gauge (reference station 2) and points 1, 2 and 3
(reference stations 3, 4 and 5, respectively) as defined in Hidrodata staff (2006).
91
Table 7.1 Coordinates of the three control points used for the model calibration
Designation Coordinates (DTLXMIL) Coordinates (WGS84)
M (m) P (m) Latitude Longitude
Reference Station 3* 142697 524962 41 41' 31,142'' N -08 49' 17,278'' W
Reference Station 4** 143495 525154 41 41' 37,570'' N -08 48' 42,838'' W
Reference Station 5*** 145173 524893 41 41' 29,534'' N -08 47' 30,192'' W
*Point 1; **Point 2; ***Point 3 (Hidrodata staff, 2006)
Table 7.2 Wetting/drying default options
Option Value
Minimum water depth (m) 0.05
Minimum number of dry time steps 12
Number of rewetting time steps 12
Minimum velocity for wetting (m/s) 0.05
7.2.2 Model instabilities assessment
After the domain has been defined, the mesh generated, the bathymetry interpolated to the
mesh and the model boundaries set according to the processes to be modelled, it is necessary
to define a set of initial parameters. After these were defined the model was run and revealed to
be unstable. These instabilities were not possible to avoid with a procedure similar to the
performed in the previous chapter, even for a wide range of different model parameters.
Different meshes were generated and tested but none provided acceptable results.
Considering this fact, further research was performed and the most problematic areas were
identified. These areas were secondary and tertiary channels, as well as the upstream
boundary. For this fact there are several reasons which might be causing these instabilities.
Among these it must highlighted: a large gradient in the flow direction (due to the channel
configuration and/or the bathymetry), insufficient or excessive mesh resolution and inadequate
model parameters. In view of this there are several measures which can be taken to solve these
instabilities. Among them reduce the time step, change the numerical and physical parameters,
refine the mesh locally and smooth the bathymetry.
The time step being closely related to the mesh and the Courant number was decreased as
much as possible and no satisfactory results were obtained. The other physical and numerical
parameters were changed without achieving better results. Local refinement of the mesh could
be performed but, since the original bathymetry file has a spatial discretization of 50 by 50 m,
this will not allow a much greater detail in reproducing the smaller channel bathymetry
configuration. Furthermore this would have caused a time step reduction which would have
increased the computational expense to unreasonable values. Once all the other options were
assessed the last consist in smoothing the bathymetry gradients.
92
As mentioned previously there are two different types of areas where the model show local
instabilities: narrow secondary channels and the upstream boundary. With respect to the narrow
channels it can be stated that with the generated mesh and bathymetry resolution it is not
possible to simulate the smaller channels hydrodynamics. Nonetheless, since in the DTM these
channels were considered, there are some errors which might have appeared during the two
interpolation stages: the first from the high resolution DTM for a 50 by 50 m grid and the second
from this grid to the used mesh. This implies that, for scales smaller than 50 m, there might be
significant errors such as steeper and higher shoals, as well as, deeper and steeper
depressions. These artificial changes, resulting from the grid discretization, imply a
misrepresentation of the natural bathymetry. The impact of this might be mitigated by editing the
bathymetry of these channels.
Another issue which has to be accounted for is the upstream boundary. This boundary has
been defined as a boundary with no normal flow (Natural mainland boundary), however, the
local hydrodynamic process imply a significant flow. At this stage, it was opted to maintain the
same boundary and artificially modify the local bathymetry such that the local flow through it can
be neglected. This is reasonable due to the distance of this boundary to the interest area.
Nevertheless, further in the modelling procedure the bathymetry will be changed to the initial
state to consider the river flow.
The changes made are presented in figure 7.3. As aforementioned, these changes consisted in
reducing excessive gradients in the flow direction, smoothing both deep depressions and steep
shoals and decrease the water depth in the upstream boundary.
Figure 7.3 Differences between the final bathymetry considered and the interpolated from the
scatter set in the tidal flats area.
The legitimacy of the bathymetry changes performed and presented in figure 7.3 might be
questioned. Nonetheless, it should be emphasized that the natural flow configuration is not
changed qualitatively and little quantitatively. It is believed that any change in the friction
coefficient is likely to induce larger changes in velocities and consequentially in the flow than
93
these bathymetry changes. Consequently, this process can be seen as a last calibration
measure which has to be performed as a last resource and judiciously and with the utmost care.
7.2.3 Final model setup
After the initial testing of the model setup, the setup to perform the calibration must be
mentioned. A similar procedure to the used in the previous chapter was performed and herein
presented. This initial set of calibration parameters are designated as SCN_0_EST and are
presented in table 7.3. These parameters were chosen considering the previous calibration for
the oceanic domain and the initial simulations for which the model was stable. In figure 7.4 the
final bathymetry used for the calibration is presented. It was chosen to present the legend upper
boundary until a depth of approximately 14 m to emphasize the shallow areas of the domain
and, thus, also the tidal flats. No changes were performed seaside of the Lima river mouth.
Figure 7.4 Final bathymetry considered in the model calibration.

Table 7.3 Model input parameters for the Lima estuary used during the calibration
Parameter Model initial parameters
Mesh M_EST
Coriolis Constant = 0.0001
Friction coefficient Constant quadratic (0.30)
Time step 0.5 s
Ramp period 0.20 days
Run time 2 days
Mainland Boundary Condition Natural
94
The model was calibrated based on these parameters using the water surface elevation and
th th
velocity field measured during the Hidrodata survey conducted during the period 5 - 14
October 2006. The calibration procedure is presented in the section 7.3.
In figure 7.5 the Courant number for the studied domain is presented and it can be seen this
parameter ranges from values close to 0.0 to approximately 0.5. This is expected based on the
mesh generation size function having been computed based on a time step larger than one
second and can be seen as a good indicator that any mesh instabilities are not caused by the
Courant number.
Figure 7.5 Computed Courant number based on the size function considered to build the
estuarine mesh for a time step of 0.5s.
7.3 Model calibration

The calibration for the estuarine domain was made based on the Hidrodata survey in 2006
which considers four points. From these, two out of three points which are located inside the
considered domain are defined as benchmarks for the model calibration. For one of the points -
reference station 4 the recorded velocities are affected by local effects - diurnal oscillations
instead of semidiurnal (Hidrodata staff, 2006). These effects are not possible to consider in the
used sequence and thus were not considered during the model calibration. For those points the
water surface elevation and the velocity field were recorded during the survey period. As
mentioned in the previous section, these points are denominated in the model as reference
stations 3 and 5 (figure 7.2).
The calibration procedure will deem both the water surface elevation and the velocity field data.
Considering the computational expense of each run, a period of 2 days will be used instead of
the 10 days used in the previous chapter. This was chosen considering not only the academic
95
purpose and challenge of calibrating the model with little time consumption and applying the
knowledge obtained in the previous chapter, but also the engineering perspective. In this
engineering perspective, during a project the resources are limited (to extremely limited
frequently) with respect to its requirements. For this purpose, the main focus in this part of the
report will be placed in calibrating critically with low computational expense. Nonetheless,
several parameter combinations were defined to allow for a sound calibration and to obtain
satisfactory results.
Initial simulations were performed to assess the mesh stability and it was revealed that time
steps ranging from 0.5 to 2.0 s do not turn the mesh unstable but a time step of 4 s is not
possible for the present ramp value and mesh. This was tested to define an upper boundary for
the time step and a time step of 1.0 s was considered to agreement with figure 7.5 (maximum
Courant number lower than one and more efficient computationally).
7.3.1 Initial scenario - SCN_0_EST
The initial scenario (SCN_0_EST) is set based on the best calibration parameters for the
oceanic domain set in chapter 6. In table 7.4 an overview of the most important model
parameters considered for the initial scenario (SCN_0_EST) is presented. It should be noted
the fact a lower time step and ramp value were possible to consider. Having in mind the fact the
main purpose of the present study is assessing the storm surge phenomenon, the water surface
elevation will be the main comparing variable when deciding between very similar results.
Table 7.4 Overview of the parameters considered in the initial scenario (SCN_0_EST)
Parameter Information
Friction coefficient 0.30 (Constant quadratic)
Time step 1.0 s
Ramp period 0.10 days
Run time 2.0 days
Mainland boundary condition Natural
In figures F.1 to F.4 (Appendix F), it is presented the observed and the computed water surface
elevation, the u,v velocity components, the velocity module and the direction for the three points
with measured data. It should be noted that a vertical adjustment of 2.38 m, instead of the
expected 2.00 m, had to be performed to account for systematic errors in the recorded data
reference level. As mentioned previously, reference station 4 shows a diurnal current velocity
pattern and, according to the Hidrodata report (2006) this is related to local effects. Therefore
this point will not be used for the calibration of the velocity field.
96
7.3.2 Calibration scenarios
In this subsection the model is calibrated regarding several combinations of parameters. The
combinations which have not crashed the model are presented in table 7.5. It should be noted
that for this calibration the chosen Coriolis parameter was constant considering the small
domain in latitude.
Table 7.5 Values of the parameters considered in each of the calibration scenarios
SCN_0_EST SCN_A SCN_B SCN_C SCN_D
Wave continuity 0.0010 0.0050 0.1000 0.0050 0.0050
Lateral viscosity 20.0 20 30 10 30
Friction coefficient 0.30 0.20 0.30 0.10 0.20
In table 7.6 the statistical analysis for the water surface elevation between the observed and
modelled is presented for reference station 3. In figure 7.6 the velocity module at reference
station 3 for the different scenarios is presented. From these results it can be concluded that the
best scenario was SCN_C. This is the scenario with the lowest friction coefficient value and, as
expected, provides the better agreement with the recorded velocities both qualitatively and
quantitatively.
Table 7.6 Statistical analysis for the water surface level at reference station 3
SCN_0_EST SCN_A SCN_B SCN_C SCN_D
Bias (cm) -7.608 -7.749 -8.784 -6.963 -7.718
Accuracy (cm) 9.857 9.484 12.108 7.616 9.481
Skill 0.9748 0.9767 0.9588 0.9858 0.9767
Maximum difference (cm) 12.207 10.627 16.335 4.752 10.681
Minimum difference (cm) -35.569 -33.894 -44.903 -22.925 -33.830
RMSE (cm) 12.194 11.724 15.578 9.160 11.709
0.80
Observed (HZ) SCN_0_EST SCN_A
0.70 SCN_B SCN_C SCN_D
0.60
Velocity module (m/s)
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
11-10-06 00:00 12-10-06 00:00 13-10-06 00:00
Figure 7.6 Recorded and modelled velocity module at reference station 3 for different scenarios.
97
7.4 Model validation
In this section the model setup obtained after calibration is validated. This validation is
th th
performed analysing a longer period (4 18 October 2006), corresponding to a spring-neap
th
tidal cycle, and with the recorded data at the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge during the period 12
th
18 October 1987. The Viana do Castelo tidal gauge was considered located in reference
station 1.
In figure 7.7 the observed and modelled water surface elevation for reference station 3 (point 1 -
th th
Hidrodata staff, 2006) in the period 5 - 18 October 2006 is presented. In figure 7.8 the same
th th
data is presented for the period 12 - 18 October 1987. Analysing both figures, it is possible to
see a good agreement and that the model does not show any spurious oscillations, which have
appeared before the bathymetry was modified. This allows concluding that these changes were
a reasonable and a legitimate solution providing satisfactory results.
4.50
Point 1 observed
4.00
CD water surface elevation (m)
Point 1 modelled
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
04-10-06 06-10-06 08-10-06 10-10-06 12-10-06 14-10-06 16-10-06 18-10-06
Figure 7.7 Observed and modelled water surface elevation for reference station 3 (Point 1
th th
Hidrodata staff, 2006) in the period 4 - 18 October 2006.
Observed
1.00 Modelled (Oceanic Domain)
Modelled (Estuarine Domain)
0.50
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
12-10-87 13-10-87 14-10-87 15-10-87 16-10-87 17-10-87 18-10-87
Figure 7.8 Observed and modelled water surface elevation at the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge in
th th
the period 12 - 18 October 1987.
98
7.5 Storm surge modelling for the Lima estuary
7.5.1 Introduction
In this section the storm surge phenomena is assessed for the Lima estuary. For this purpose,
the previously considered agents: wind and atmospheric pressure will be combined with the
river flow. The atmospheric pressure and the wind data used are the same as in the previous
chapter. Considering the fact these were defined in a very coarse grid, for the purpose of this
study no further considerations are made. Nonetheless, it should be mentioned that data from
IH, as analysed in chapter 5, is available since 2002. Thus, when modelling surge events after
this year, it is recommended to include this point in the previous scatter. After this inclusion, the
obtained scatter must be triangulated so that the wind and pressure data are not as coarsely
defined and can be interpolated to the defined mesh.
7.5.2 Lima river flow data
In this subsection the flow in the Lima River was obtained from the SNIRH website [14]. The
information respects to the Forno da Cal (03F/01H) hydrometric station, which is located
approximately 27 km upstream of the Lima mouth, and is represented in figure 7.9. This station
was chosen since it is the closest to the Lima estuary with adequate data.
For this station maximum annual flow, average daily flow, monthly flow and daily mean level is
th
freely available to the general public. At that station, the average daily flow is available from 4
th
October 1978 till 30 September 1988. This parameter was chosen as the input data for the
model. This choice is justified since it will serve the purpose of assessing the importance of
considering the river flow to reproduce the water surface elevation recorded during storm
events.
Figure 7.9 Forno da Cal hydrometric station position in the Lima river.
99
In table 7.7 the mean daily flow values for the period considered during the simulations are
presented and, in figure 7.10, the corresponding hydrograph.
th th
Table 7.7 Mean daily flow for the Forno da Cal hydrometric station in the 10 20 October 1987
period
Date Mean daily flow (m3/s)
10-10-1987 00:00 90.93
11-10-1987 00:00 60.99
12-10-1987 00:00 46.03
13-10-1987 00:00 42.62
14-10-1987 00:00 87.92
15-10-1987 00:00 241.74
16-10-1987 00:00 320.46
17-10-1987 00:00 254.14
18-10-1987 00:00 171.69
19-10-1987 00:00 176.27
20-10-1987 00:00 209.38
350.0
Mean daily flow (m3/s)
300.0
Mean daily flow (m3/s)
250.0
200.0
150.0
100.0
50.0
0.0
10-10-87 12-10-87 14-10-87 16-10-87 18-10-87 20-10-87
th th
Figure 7.10 Forno da Cal approximate hydrograph in the 10 20 October 1987 period.
7.5.3 Influence of the domain size
The effect of the domain size in capturing the nature of the phenomena is assessed in this
subsection by comparing the computed surge using the oceanic domain (mesh M0) and the
computed surge using the estuarine domain (mesh M_EST).
The obtained results are presented in figure 7.11 and some conclusions drawn. Among the
most important aspects, it can be stated that both domains reproduce the storm surge equally
qualitatively but quantitatively small differences can be observed. Analysing with more detail, it
is possible to see a slightly underprediction for the smaller domain which might be explained by
the wind effect not being so well captured in small domains. This is based in the previous
100
chapter where the relative effects of both the wind and atmospheric pressure were assessed.
Furthermore, it should be mentioned that this is according to the findings of Blain et al. (1994).
1.00
Observed residuals
Computed residuals (Oceanic Domain)
0.80
Computed residuals (Estuarine Domain)
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
-0.20
12-10-87 13-10-87 14-10-87 15-10-87 16-10-87 17-10-87 18-10-87
Figure 7.11 Observed residuals and computed residuals for the two considered domains: oceanic
(M0) and estuarine (M_EST).
7.5.4 Surge assessment in the river estuary using only meteorology forcing
In this subsection it is assessed the effect of the river flow, atmospheric pressure and wind over
the estuary. This is performed using the model forced only by these three factors. The results
are presented in figure 7.12. As previously mentioned reference stations 1 to 5 represent the 5
model recording stations, respectively from downstream to upstream.
0.80 Reference station 1

Reference station 2
Reference station 3
0.60
Reference station 4
Reference station 5
0.40
Observed residuals
0.20
0.00
-0.20
12-10-87 13-10-87 14-10-87 15-10-87 16-10-87 17-10-87 18-10-87
Figure 7.12 Water surface elevations for the 5 model reference stations and comparison with
observed residuals in the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge.
It can be concluded that for the upstream stations the surge height is more pronounced. This
can be either due to the river flow or by piling up of the water due to the wind stresses. The
most probable effect is the river flow. Furthermore, the effect of the river flow must be assessed
more carefully since it can be strongly affected by the friction coefficient.
101
7.5.5 Assessment of the astronomy, meteorology and river flow influence
In this last modelling subsection, the storm surge event is modelled considering simultaneously
all the factors thought to contribute for the surge event except the wave induced ones - wave
set-up and radiation stresses. The wave related factors might assume a significant importance
near the river mouth but further upstream the effect is expected to fade due to dissipation. The
existing breakwaters sheltering effect cannot also be disregarded and play a major role on this
dissipation.
The model setup used is the same as in the previous subsection and the results are presented
in figure 7.11. Analysing figure 7.11, and using the information obtained previously, it can be
concluded that modelling storm surge considering both astronomy and meteorology forcing
simultaneously causes lower low tide peaks and higher high tides. This fact leads to concluding
that there is a significant transfer of energy between astronomy and meteorology action.
It should be strongly emphasized the final conclusion of the present dissertation which is made
based on the river flow effect in the tidal elevation while modelling. It is clear from figure 7.14
that the river flow has a major interaction with the astronomic tide materialized by significantly
higher high tides and lower low tides than if this factor was not considered.
3.50
Water surface elevation referred to CD (m)
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00 Observed water level
Computed water level (Meteorology and Astronomy jointly) (Oceanic Domain)

0.50
Computed water level (Meteorology, Astronomy and River Flow jointly)
(Estuarine Domain)
0.00
12-10-87 14-10-87 16-10-87 18-10-87
Figure 7.13 Comparison between the observed values, modelled with astronomy and
meteorology for the oceanic domain and modelled with astronomy, meteorology and river flow for
the estuarine domain.
In figure 7.14, the estuarine hydrodynamic circulation is presented at different phases of the
tidal cycle and during the storm surge event. This is presented to show the modelled estuarine
circulation before, during and after the surge event. It can be seen the strong river influence in
the tidal flat areas and the patent water level gradient between the upstream and the
downstream part of the river. It can also be seen the area where the river flow is much stronger
102
and a reduction in the flooding velocities. It should also be noted the significantly larger flooded
area during the storm peak and during spring tides as suggested by figure 7.13.
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
(e) (f)
(g) (h)
th
Figure 7.14 Tidal flats water surface elevations and velocity field at: (a) 14 October 1987 00:00
th th th
UTM, (b) 15 October 1987 00:00 UTM, (c) 15 October 1987 00:00 UTM, (d) 15 October 1987 12:00
th th th
UTM, (e) 15 October 1987 18:00 UTM, (f) 16 October 1987 00:00 UTM, (g) 17 October 1987 01:00
th
UTM and (h) 17 October 1987 19:00 UTM.
103
8 Final considerations
8.1 Concluding remarks

After the present dissertation has been elaborated, there are several aspects addressed
throughout the document which must be highlighted.
Firstly, the importance of adequately couple different altimetry and bathymetry data. This is
especially significant to avoid the discontinuities and inaccuracies, which are likely to occur
when the datasets are referred to different coordinate systems.
The field survey served its purpose adequately and important lessons were drawn. Among
these, it should be emphasized the importance of assessing the required data precision while
using each equipment over the survey area. In areas with highest variability and if the average
state is wanted a lowest precision might be considered. For example, in highly energetic open
coast areas, where natural variability is large, it is possible and recommended to consider a
lower precision than inside an estuary with small to moderate flow.
Prior to the modelling sequence, the available data must be carefully analysed. Regarding
atmospheric pressure data, it must be stated that the IH records may be used, when simulating
periods with data availability, as a complement to the hindcasted by NOAA and ECMRF.
Nonetheless, further information concerning its peaks must be obtained.
Concerning mesh generation, it must be mentioned the need to create size functions which are
able to account for significant bathymetry changes such as the existing in the vicinity of the
continental slope. The defined size function must be capable of accounting for these significant
gradients, which otherwise will compromise the mesh quality, the computational expense and
the obtained results.
A high importance was attributed to the calibration sequence since the final results and
conclusions are heavily driven by the parameters chosen at this stage. After concluding the
present work, it is obvious the significantly higher requirements, modeller experience and skill
required when modelling phenomena with significantly different scales (spatial and temporal).
After modelling the storm event it is obvious the qualitative quality of the obtained results.
Nevertheless, quantitatively the results still have a significant difference with respect to the
recorded by the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge. This might be explained by the parameters used,
the influence of the wave radiation stresses (especially in the oceanic domain) and the
considered estuarine domain size. The considered meteorological data should not be
disregarded, since the grid, for which it is defined, is considerably coarse and is the result of
hindcast modelling. This type of modelling might not consider all the factors and local
phenomena.
The nonlinear interaction between astronomy and meteorology forcing, for the considered
scenarios and implemented modelling strategies, should also be emphasized. Considering this
104
fact, it is the authors recommendation to further investigate the phenomena. However, if the
obtained results are to be used, from a safety point of view, the coupled phenomena is more
likely to provide better insight into the phenomena. The results also show that coupling this
forcings allow a better reproduction of the high tide levels during the storm, whereas the
superposition of the model results allows a better reproduction of the low tide water levels
during the storm and outside this period in general. Having this is mind, at the moment of the
elaboration of this work, it is recommended to always perform the three types of simulation if
sufficient resources are available. This is justified since, by doing this and by having the
previous analysis in mind, it is possible to combine the results: the coupled simulation is used to
reproduce the high tide periods during the storm and the two superposed simulations
(meteorology plus astronomy) used for the rest of the periods.
The consideration of the river flow implies additional care since the energy transfers are
extremely nonlinear. This implies a more careful analysis than the performed in this work before
sound recommendations can be provided.
8.2 Future developments
After the present thesis has been elaborated several aspects remained unaddressed.
Prior to the simulation of the storm surge phenomenon the available data should be analysed.
As previously mentioned, the time series stationarity is not an imperative consideration for the
simulation of one storm surge event. Nevertheless, to assess the flooding risk and to build risk
charts it is important to account for long term variations.
Another aspect that was not addressed is the consideration of a higher resolution digital terrain
grid. The used grid to extract the bathymetry data from the Lima estuary DTM to the bathymetry
scatter set had a resolution of 50 m x 50 m. An increased resolution may be obtained by
considering a resolution equal to the size of the minimum element or half the size of the
narrowest channel to be considered, e.g. 10 to 30 m. This is likely to solve some of the
problems encountered during simulating the estuarine hydrodynamics.
An enormous amount of aspects concerning mesh generation might be studied. Mentioning only
some of these it may be interesting to investigate the definition of more efficient size functions
such that the element area transition is not very abrupt in the continental slope. This may, for
instance, consist of defining a size function based not only in the wavelength, but as a
composition with other functions with a purpose of smoothing locally abrupt element transitions,
thus achieving a more gently varying element size. As an example a two-dimensional Gaussian
function might be used near the continental shelf and in places where the transition is to abrupt.
Another possibility is to combine this mesh generation with another tool: Local Truncation Error
Analysis for the oceanic domain. Inside the estuary, due to shallower areas (tidal flats) with wet
and dry processes, this option is not recommended. This is stated from testing and since no
105
satisfactory results were obtained, most likely due to the assumptions inherent to this
methodology. Even though it could have been considered in the oceanic domain, since the most
complex issues appeared only inside the estuary, it was not tested.
Considering time constraints and steering model incompatibilities, the wave set-up influence, via
the radiation stresses, was not considered for the surge reproduction. An improvement in the
results is expected when this aspect is considered. With this forcing mechanism the surge
height is expected to be incremented by ~15 cm at its peak based in the results obtained by
Arajo et al. (2011). To consider these effects the STWAVE or CMS-WAVE models might be
used.
Another aspect that could be further analysed is the necessity of considering a large friction
coefficient, which implies lower velocities than expected in reality. This issue was not
considered to be predominant over other concerns since the water level has a much weaker
influence of this parameter than velocities and the main purpose of the present paper was
simulating storm surge heights.
Furthermore, since the present dissertation will serve as background to a long-term project to
create a risk chart for the Lima estuary, a more careful analysis of the model boundaries should
be performed, such that places sheltered by walls, breakwaters and other structures are
considered. This is especially important to simulate the wave effects inside the estuary and to
model the related phenomena: reflection, diffraction, refraction, shoaling, wave-current
interaction, etc. The study of these phenomena might serve to the elaboration of significantly
detailed and specific studies.
106
References
Albiach, J.C.C., Fanjul, E.A., Lahoz, M.G., Gomez, B.P., Sanchez-Arevalo, I.R. 2000. Ocean
forecasting in narrow shelf seas: application to the Spanish coasts. Coastal Engineering, 41,
1- 3, 269-293.
Arajo, M.A.V.C., Trigo-Teixeira, A. and Mazzolari, A., 2010(a). Simulation of storm surge
events at the Portuguese coast (Viana do Castelo). Internal report.
Arajo, M.A.V.C., Trigo-Teixeira, A. and Mazzolari, A., 2010(b). Simulation of storm tide height
return periods at the Portuguese Coast (Viana do Castelo). Littoral 2010, September, London.
Arajo, M.A.V.C.; Mazzolari, A. and Trigo-Teixeira, A., 2011. Wave set-up in the modelling of
storm surge at Viana do Castelo (Portugal). Journal of Coastal Research, SI 64 (Proceedings
of the 11th International Coastal Symposium), pp. 971-975. Szczecin, Poland, ISSN 0749-
0208.
Blain, C.A., J.J. Westerink and R.A. Luettich, Jr, 1994, The influence of domain size on the
response characteristics of a hurricane storm surge model, Journal of Geophysical Research,
99(C9):18,467-18,479.
Blain, C.A., J.J. Westerink and R.A. Luettich, Jr., 1998, Grid convergence studies for the
prediction of hurricane storm surge, International Journal of Numerical Methods in Fluids, Vol.
26, Issue 4, 28 February 1998, pp. 369-401.
Casaca, J., Matos, J., Baio, M. 2005. Topografia Geral. 5Edio. Lidel. Lisboa. 388 pp.
Casaca, J., Falco, A.P., 2008. A revoluo altimtrica do sculo XXI. Revista Engenharia e
Vida, no. 45, Lisbon, Portugal.
CEHIDRO, 2004, Centro de Estudos de Hidrossistemas, APDL. Porto de Leixes. Terminal de

Petroleiros. Ondas de Longo Perodo. Modelao Matemtica.
Cuvelier, C., Segal, A., Steenhoven, A.A. van, 1986. Finite element methods and Navier-Stokes
equations. D. Reidel Publishing Company. Dordrecht, Holland. 483 pp.
Defant, A. 1961. Physical oceanography. Oxford, Pergamon Press, vol. 2, 598 pp.
Falco, A.P., 2010. A transformao de altitudes geomtricas GNSS em altitudes gravticas no

contexto dos trabalhos topogrficos. PhD Thesis, Instituto Superior Tcnico, Technical
University of Lisbon.
Falco, A. P., Gonalves, A.B., Silva, N.R.C.M., Braz, N., Lima, J.N., Amlia, M.A.V.C., Trigo-
Teixeira, A., 2011. Construction of an elevation model for the evaluation of estuarine flooding
frequency: the case of Lima River, Portugal. Proceedings 7th International Symposium on
Spatial Data Quality, Coimbra, Portugal.
107
Fanjul, E. .; Prez Gmez, B., Carretero, J.C. and Rodrguez Sanchez Arevalo, I., 1998. Tide
and surge dynamics along the Iberian Atlantic Coast. Oceanologia. Acta,. 21(2): pp. 131-143.
Fanjul, E. .; Prez Gmez, B., Carretero, J.C. and Rodrguez Sanchez Arevalo, I., 2001.
Nivmar: A storm surge forecasting system for Spanish Waters. Sci. Mar. 65 (Suppl.1): pp. 145-
154.
Featherstone, W. E., Dentith, M. C. e Kirby, J. F., 1998,. Strategies for the accurate
determination of orthometric heights from GPS. Survey Review, Vol. 34, pp. 267-296.
Ferreira, O.; Dias, J.A.,and Taborda, R., 2008. Implications of sea-level rise for continental
Portugal. Journal of Coastal Research, 24(2), pp. 317324. West Palm Beach (Florida), ISSN
0749-0208.
Fotopoulos, G. (2005). Calibration of geoid error models via a combined adjustment of

ellipsoidal, orthometric and gravimetric geoid height data. Journal of Geodesy, Vol. 79, pp.
111-123.
Gama, C., Dias, A., Ferreira, O. and Taborda, R., 1994. Analysis of storm surge in Portugal
between June 1986 and May 1988. Littoral 94, Lisbon, 381-387.
Hagen, S.C., J.J. Westerink, R.L. Kolar and O. Horstmann, 2001, Two Dimensional
Unstructured Mesh Generation for Tidal Models, International Journal for Numerical Methods
in Fluids, 35, pp. 669-686.
Hartwing, M., 2005. Numerical Wave Simulation for long-period waves in the harbour of
Leixes. Master thesis. Lisboa. Instituto Superior Tcnico.
Hidrodata staff, 2006. Relatrio levantamento topo-batimtrico, campanha de medio de

correntes e nveis e recolha de amostras 0506-A2P. Hidrodata. Lisbon. Portugal.
Holthuijsen, L.H., 2007. Waves in Oceanic and Coastal Waters, Cambridge University Press,
387 pp.
Hooijberg, M., 2008. Geometrical Geodesy. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. 440 pp.
Howlett, J.D., 2005. Size function based mesh relaxation. MSc thesis.. Birgham Young
University. 86 pp.
Hurn, J., 1993. Differential GPS explained, Trimble Navigation.
Kalnay, E., Kanamitsu, M., Kistler, R., Collins, W., Deaven, D., Gandin, L., Iredell, M., Saha, S.,
White, G., Woollen, J., Zhu, Y., Leetmaa, A., Reynolds, B., Chelliah, M., Ebisuzaki, W.,
Higgins, W., Janowiak, J., Mo, K.C., Ropelewski, C., Wang, J., Jenne, R. and Joseph, D.,
1996. The NCEP/NCAR 40-year reanalysis project. Bull Am Meteorol Soc., 77, 437471.
Kara, A.B., A. J. Wallcraft, Hurlburt, H. E., 2005: Sea surface temperature sensitivity to water
turbidity from simulations of the turbid Black Sea using HYCOM. J. Phys. Oceanogr., 35, 33
54.
108
Kim, S.Y.; Yasuda, T. and Mase H., 2010. Wave set-up in the storm surge along open coasts
during Typhoon Anita. Coastal Engineering, 57, 631-642.
Instituto Geogrfico Portugus, 2009. Margrafo de Cascais: um instrumento centenrio de

Amde-Philippe Borrel: 1882. Texts by Maria Helena Kol. Lisboa, IGP, 41pp. ISBN 978-972-
8867-55-3.
Lee, T.L., 2006. Neural network prediction of a storm surge. Ocean Engineering 33 (34), 483
494.
Le Provost, C., Genco, M. L., Lyard, F., Vincent, P., and Cenceill, P. 1994. Spectroscopy of the
world ocean tides from a hydrodynamic finite element model, Journal of Geophysical
Research 99(C12), 24,777-24,797.
Lima, N., Henriques, M.J., Casaca, J., 2007 A incerteza de vectores GNSS em funo do
comprimento e durao da sesso. Actas da V conferncia Nacional de Cartografia e
Geodesia.
Luettich, R. A., Westerink, J. J., and Schefmer, N. W., 1992. ADCIRC: An advanced three-
dimensional circulation model for shelves, coasts, and estuaries. Report 1: Theory and
methodology of ADCIRC- 2DDI and ADCIRC-3DL. Technical Report DRP-92-6, U.S. Army
Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Luettich, R.A., Jr., and Westerink, J.J., 1995. Continental Shelf Scale Convergence Studies with
a Barotropic Tidal Model. Quantitative Skill Assessment for Coastal Ocean Models, D. Lynch
and A. Davies [eds.], Coastal and Estuarine Studies series, vol. 48, pp. 349-371, American
Geophysical Union press, Washington, D.C.
Luettich, R.A., Jr., and Westerink, J.J., 1995(b). An Assessment of Flooding and Drying
Techniques for Use in the ADCIRC Hydrodynamic Model: Implementation and Performance in
One-Dimensional Flows. Report for the Department of the Army, Contract Number DACW39-
94-M-5869.
Luettich, R.A., Jr., and Westerink, J.J., 2004. Formulation and numerical implementation of the
2D/3D ADCIRC Finite Element Model Version 44.XX. 74 pp.
Mazzolari, A., 2010. Storm surge modelling at Viana do Castelo Grid refinement and wider
Atlantic Domain. Internal report n.2.
Pawlowicz, R.; Beardsley, B. and Lentz, S., 2002. Classical tidal harmonic analysis including
error estimates in MATLAB using T_TIDE, Computers & Geosciences, 28, 929937.
Pugh, D.T. 1987. Tides, surges and mean sea-level: a handbook for engineers and scientists.
Wiley, Chichester, 472pp.
Rebordo, I., 2008. Anlise do potencial energtico dos fluxos de mar no esturio do Lima.
Lisbon, Portugal: Instituto Superior Tcnico, MSc thesis, 78 pp.
109
Rebordo, I. and Trigo-Teixeira, A., 2009. Tidal Propagation in the Lima Estuary. Journal of
th
Coastal Research, SI 56 (Proceedings of the 10 International Coastal Symposium), 1400-
1404. Lisbon, Portugal, ISSN 0749-0258.
Reid, R.O. (1990). Water level changes. Handbook of coastal and ocean engineering, Edited by
J.B. Herbich. Gulf Publishing Co., Houston, Texas.
Roelvink, J.A., A.J.H.M. Reniers, A.R. van Dongeren, J.S.M. van Thiel de Vries, R.T. McCall
and J. Lescinski, 2009. Modelling storm impacts on beaches, dunes and barrier islands,
Coastal Engineering, Vol. 56, (11-12), pp 1133-1152.
Smith, S.D. and Banke, E.G. (1975). Variation of the sea surface drag coefficient with wind
speed. Quartely Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 101, 665-673.
Smith, W. and Sandwell, D., 1997. Global seafloor topography from satellite altimetry and ship
depth soundings. Science, 277, 1957-1962, 26 Sep.
Sutherland, J., Peet, A.H. and Soulsby, R.L., 2004. Evaluating the performance of
morphological models. Coastal Engineering 51, pp. 917-939.
Taborda, R. and Dias, J.M.A., 1992. Anlise da sobreelevao do nvel do mar de origem
meteorolgica durante os temporais de Feveiro/ Maro de 1978 e Dezembro de 1981.
Geonovas n1 especial Geologia e o Ambiente, pp. 89-97.
Trigo-Teixeira, A., 1993. Finite element modelling of hydrodynamics in coastal zones. Swansea,
United Kingdom. University College of Swansea. PhD thesis, 137 pp.
Uppala, S.M., Kllberg, P.W., Simmons, A.J., Andrae, U., da Costa Bechtold, V., Fiorino, M.,
Gibson, J.K., Haseler, J., Hernandez, A., Kelly, G.A., Li, X., Onogi, K., Saarinen, S., Sokka, N.,
Allan, R.P., Andersson, E., Arpe, K., Balmaseda, M.A., Beljaars, A.C.M., van de Berg, L.,
Bidlot, J., Bormann, N., Caires, S., Chevallier, F., Dethof, A., Dragosavac, M., Fisher, M.,
Fuentes, M., Hagemann, S., Hlm, E., Hoskins, B.J., Isaksen, L., Janssen, P.A.E.M., Jenne,
R., McNally, A.P., Mahfouf, J.-F., Morcrette, J.-J., Rayner, N.A., Saunders, R.W., Simon, P.,
Sterl, A., Trenberth, K.E., Untch, A., Vasiljevic, D., Viterbo, P., and Woollen, J., 2005. The
ERA-40 re-analysis. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 131, 2961-3012.
Vested, H.J., Nielsen, J.W., Jensen, H.R., Kristensen, K.B., 1995. Skill assessment of an
operational Hydrodynamic Forecast system for the North Sea and Danish Belts. Quantitative
skill assessment for coastal ocean models. AGU pp. 373398.
Westerink, J.J. and Luettich , R.A., 1991. Tide and Storm Surge Predictions in the gulf of
Mexico using model ADCIRC-2D. Report to the US Army Waterways Experimentation Station.
Westerink, J.J., R.A. Luettich, A.M. Baptista, N.W. Scheffner and P. Farrar, 1992. Tide and
storm surge predictions using finite element model, ASCE Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,
118(10):pp. 1373-1390.
110
Westerink, J.J., Luettich, R.A., Blain, C.A., and Hagen, S.C., 1995. Surface Elevation and
Circulation in Continental Margin Waters. Finite Element Modelling of Environmental
Problems, G.F. Carey [ed.], pp. 39-59, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.
Websites
[1] http://blog.poemsbyname.com/nature-poems/waves/
[2] www.hidrografico.pt/glossario-cientifico-mares.php
[3] http://www.igeo.pt/produtos/geodesia/vg/renep/renep.asp
[4] http://www.leica-geosystems.com/en/Leica-Geo-Office_4611.htm
[5] http://www.igeo.pt/produtos/geodesia/GeodPT08.htm
[6] http://fcit.usf.edu/florida/teacher/science/mod2/resources/beach.profiles.pdf
[7] http://www.hydro.gov.au/prodserv/tides/tidal-glossary.htm
[8] http://www.adcirc.org
[9] http://adcirc.org/documentv49/Architecture.html
[10] http://cirp.usace.army.mil/news/events/SMSWorkshop/SMSfiles/13_Mesh_-Generation-
ADCIRC_Params.pdf
[11] http://www.ems-i.com/SMS/SMS_Overview/sms_overview.html
[12] http://www.xmswiki.com/xms/ (Scalar Paving Density, Patch, Paving)
[13] http://www.unc.edu/ims/adcirc/documentv47/parameter_defs.html
[14] http://snirh.pt/index.php
111
Appendixes
Appendix A Viana do Castelo tide table

Table A. 1 Viana do Castelo tide table for July, August and September 2010 [Source: Portuguese
Hydrographic Institute (Instituto Hidrogrfico)]
112
Table A. 2 Reference data and respective height for the Viana do Castelo tidal gauge [Hidrodata,
2006]
Datum MHWS MHWN MSL MLWN MLWS
Water surface height 3.5 2.7 2.0 1.3 0.5
113
Appendix B - T_TIDE output
In this appendix the T_TIDE output is presented. To maintain the number of pages under a
reasonable value it was preferred to only show the tidal constituents with a SNR above the
defined threshold.
Table B. 1 T_TIDE output for a minimum SNR of 500 (6 harmonic constituents)

Harmonic constituent Frequency (rad/s) Amplitude (cm) Amplitude error (cm) Phase () Phase error () SNR
*M2 0.080511 102.8742 0.506 104.36 0.34 41000
*S2 0.083333 35.9811 0.483 133.13 0.9 5600
*K1 0.041781 7.1644 0.181 76.31 1.2 1600
*N2 0.078999 22.1766 0.564 86.19 1.49 1500
*O1 0.038731 6.2985 0.17 333.69 1.32 1400
*K2 0.083562 9.9208 0.379 131.65 2.32 680

*M2 0.080511 102.8742 0.621 104.36 0.33 27000
*S2 0.083333 35.9811 0.532 133.13 0.81 4600
*O1 0.038731 6.2985 0.143 333.69 1.55 1900
*K1 0.041781 7.1644 0.163 76.31 1.36 1900
*N2 0.078999 22.1766 0.577 86.19 1.5 1500
*K2 0.083562 9.9208 0.403 131.65 2.22 610
*Q1 0.037219 2.419 0.174 280.14 3.71 190
*P1 0.041553 2.3422 0.208 63.44 5.07 130

*M2 0.080511 102.8742 0.57 104.36 0.33 33000
*S2 0.083333 35.9811 0.585 133.13 0.84 3800
*N2 0.078999 22.1766 0.527 86.19 1.60 1800
*O1 0.038731 6.2985 0.154 333.69 1.51 1700
*K1 0.041781 7.1644 0.177 76.31 1.42 1600
*K2 0.083562 9.9208 0.436 131.65 2.42 520
*Q1 0.037219 2.419 0.151 280.14 3.94 260
*P1 0.041553 2.3422 0.189 63.44 5.15 150
*NU2 0.079202 4.1562 0.522 94.19 7.64 63
*MU2 0.07769 3.9823 0.549 63 8.99 53
114
*M2 0.080511 102.8742 0.549 104.36 0.32 35000
*S2 0.083333 35.9811 0.485 133.13 0.77 5500
*K1 0.041781 7.1644 0.189 76.31 1.4 1400
*O1 0.038731 6.2985 0.168 333.69 1.38 1400
*N2 0.078999 22.1766 0.614 86.19 1.59 1300
*K2 0.083562 9.9208 0.374 131.65 2.48 700
*Q1 0.037219 2.0000 0.153 280.14 4.15 250
*P1 0.041553 2.3422 0.199 63.44 4.73 140
*MU2 0.07769 3.9823 0.522 63 7.56 58
*NU2 0.079202 4.1562 0.575 94.19 7.18 52
*M4 0.161023 0.649 0.094 270.49 7.9 47
*2N2 0.077487 3.5294 0.725 73.18 10.23 24
*L2 0.082024 2.1664 0.47 120.58 11.38 21

*M2 0.080511 102.8742 0.57 104.36 0.33 33000
*S2 0.083333 35.9811 0.585 133.13 0.84 3800
*N2 0.078999 22.1766 0.527 86.19 1.6 1800
*K1 0.038731 6.2985 0.154 333.69 1.51 1700
*O1 0.041781 7.1644 0.177 76.31 1.42 1600
*K2 0.083562 9.9208 0.436 131.65 2.42 520
*Q1 0.037219 2.419 0.151 280.14 3.94 260
*P1 0.041553 2.3422 0.189 63.44 5.15 150
*NU2 0.079202 4.1562 0.522 94.19 7.64 63
*MU2 0.07769 3.9823 0.549 63 8.99 53
*M4 0.161023 0.649 0.092 270.49 8.68 50
*2N2 0.077487 3.5294 0.633 73.18 9.63 31
*L2 0.082024 2.1664 0.423 120.58 12.26 26
*M3 0.163845 0.3455 0.084 17.42 16.32 17
*MS4 0.120767 0.4828 0.123 349.89 12.87 15
*2MS6 0.035706 0.5893 0.178 231.12 17.64 11
*2Q1 0.159511 0.2507 0.084 213.21 19.64 9
*M6 0.244356 0.2516 0.086 286.16 19.33 8.7
*MN4 0.241534 0.2188 0.077 233.53 23.45 8.1
*SK3 0.125114 0.2438 0.094 29.8 23.04 6.7
115
*SIG1 0.035909 0.3736 0.178 266.99 23.07 4.4
*MK3 0.037421 0.2965 0.162 322.77 32.43 3.3
*RHO1 0.122292 0.1871 0.106 348.29 31.39 3.1
*S4 0.166667 0.1389 0.083 99.9 35 2.8
*ETA2 0.085074 0.67 0.426 133.45 34.97 2.5
*LDA2 0.081821 0.7545 0.511 86.6 42.89 2.2
*2SM6 0.247178 0.0924 0.066 42.07 48.54 1.9
*MK4 0.076177 0.7622 0.563 58.34 44.91 1.8
*ALP1 0.164073 0.0972 0.072 0.92 42.55 1.8
*2MN6 0.240022 0.093 0.075 209.85 45.19 1.5
*2MK6 0.034397 0.2088 0.176 208.1 48 1.4
*PHI1 0.244584 0.0647 0.055 294.89 55.06 1.4
*EPS2 0.000228 4.5444 4.048 54.68 55.08 1.3
*SO3 0.122064 0.1133 0.098 291.16 48.32 1.3
*MO3 0.042009 0.2234 0.216 82.85 62.45 1.1
*MSK6 0.119242 0.0987 0.093 137.98 58.69 1.1

*M2 0.080511 102.8742 0.6 104.36 0.31 29000
*S2 0.083333 35.9811 0.552 133.13 0.95 4200
*K1 0.041781 7.1644 0.171 76.31 1.38 1800
*N2 0.078999 22.1766 0.562 86.19 1.41 1600
*O1 0.038731 6.2985 0.166 333.69 1.59 1400
*K2 0.083562 9.9208 0.44 131.65 2.02 510
*Q1 0.037219 2.419 0.179 280.14 4.1 180
*P1 0.041553 2.3422 0.214 63.44 4.14 120
*NU2 0.079202 4.1562 0.554 94.19 8.48 56
*M4 0.161023 0.649 0.096 270.49 7.72 46
*MU2 0.07769 3.9823 0.598 63 8.37 44
*2N2 0.077487 3.5294 0.591 73.18 10.66 36
*L2 0.082024 2.1664 0.52 120.58 10.89 17
*MS4 0.163845 0.3455 0.086 17.42 15.74 16
*M3 0.120767 0.4828 0.124 349.89 15 15
*2Q1 0.035706 0.5893 0.169 231.12 15.89 12
*2MS6 0.244356 0.2516 0.081 286.16 18.41 9.6
*MN4 0.159511 0.2507 0.084 213.21 17.46 8.8
*M6 0.241534 0.2188 0.087 233.53 24.96 6.3
*SK3 0.125114 0.2438 0.104 29.8 23.88 5.5
116
*SIG1 0.035909 0.3736 0.167 266.99 28.81 5
*RHO1 0.037421 0.2965 0.147 322.77 32.12 4.1
*S4 0.166667 0.1389 0.076 99.9 31.1 3.3
*MK3 0.122292 0.1871 0.112 348.29 32.85 2.8
*ETA2 0.085074 0.67 0.445 133.45 38.76 2.3
*MK4 0.164073 0.0972 0.063 0.92 37.71 2.3
*LDA2 0.081821 0.7545 0.52 86.6 49.22 2.1
*ALP1 0.034397 0.2088 0.158 208.1 48.5 1.7
*EPS2 0.076177 0.7622 0.611 58.34 41.34 1.6
*SO3 0.122064 0.1133 0.09 291.16 43.28 1.6
*2SM6 0.247178 0.0924 0.073 42.07 40.74 1.6
*MO3 0.119242 0.0987 0.08 137.98 58.45 1.5
*2MN6 0.240022 0.093 0.076 209.85 55.27 1.5
*3MK7 0.283315 0.0605 0.051 103.57 58.21 1.4
*SSA 0.000228 4.5444 4.029 54.68 57.58 1.3
*PHI1 0.042009 0.2234 0.195 82.85 58.36 1.3
*2MK6 0.244584 0.0647 0.059 294.89 58.3 1.2
*BET1 0.04004 0.1366 0.141 49.03 74.45 0.94
*MSK6 0.247406 0.0514 0.058 335.93 53.55 0.77
*SK4 0.166895 0.0537 0.063 162.23 57.77 0.72
*MSM 0.00131 3.454 4.109 267.77 70.94 0.71
*SO1 0.044603 0.1227 0.149 288.98 79.76 0.68
*MKS2 0.08074 0.2924 0.354 150.53 88.69 0.68
*TAU1 0.038959 0.1773 0.217 142.02 93.39 0.67
*NO1 0.040269 0.1353 0.17 59.78 85.97 0.63
*CHI1 0.040471 0.1203 0.152 358.38 74.69 0.63
*SN4 0.162333 0.0543 0.071 156.6 104.74 0.58
*OQ2 0.075975 0.3801 0.536 78.05 103.4 0.5
*M8 0.322046 0.0378 0.062 341.31 113.14 0.37
*UPS1 0.046343 0.0505 0.087 57.65 103.81 0.33
*THE1 0.043091 0.0752 0.132 96.73 139.51 0.32
*MSF 0.002822 1.695 3.102 241.19 141.93 0.3
*OO1 0.044831 0.0503 0.092 237.63 116.64 0.3
*MSN2 0.084846 0.2304 0.441 226.41 132.55 0.27
*MF 0.00305 1.2452 3.563 127.29 148.03 0.12
*2SK5 0.208447 0.014 0.043 17.58 183.55 0.11
*MM 0.001512 0.9028 3.264 202.77 168.71 0.077
*J1 0.043293 0.022 0.112 153.45 226.3 0.039
*2MK5 0.202804 0.0058 0.043 307.5 251.76 0.019
117
Appendix C Tidal gauges data
Table C. 1 Tidal gauge general information (adapted from IH)
Tidal gauge Harmonic analysis period Coordinates (ED50) HZ (m)
Viana do Castelo 30th November 1992 to 2nd December 1993 41 41.17 N 8 50.35 W -2.00
Leixes 31st December 2002 to 30th December 2003 41 11.27 N 8 42.19 W -2.00
st st
Aveiro 31 May 1999 to 31 May 2000 40 38.67 N 8 44.89 W -2.00
Figueira da Foz 31st March 1984 to 4th April 1985 40 08.97 N 8 51.28 W -2.00
Peniche One year: 1976 39 21.07 N 9 22.39 W -2.00

st th
Cascais 31 December 1990 to 30 December 1991 38 41.67 N 9 24.99 W -2.08
Sines 29th January 2000 to 29th January 2001 37 57.14 N 8 53.29 W -2.00
Lagos 23rd November 1991 to 22nd November 1992 37 05.97 N 8 39.89 W -2.00
Table C. 2 Fundamental harmonic constituents for Portuguese tidal gauges (from IH)
118
Appendix D Harmonic analysis for model validation
Table D. 1 Amplitude and phase of the main astronomical constituents at different Portuguese
tidal gauges from IH tide table and ADCIRC model output
Tidal gauge Leixes Aveiro
Type of Tide table Computed values Tide table Computed values

record
Constituents Amplitude Phase Amplitude Phase Amplitude Phase Amplitude Phase

(cm) () (cm) () (cm) () (cm) ()
M2 104.4 76.1 100.0 64.6 96.8 78.8 101.9 70.3
S2 36.6 104.4 35.5 89.7 33.4 106.9 35.8 96.5
K1 7.0 60.2 6.3 55.2 5.9 61.6 6.3 58.9
O1 6.2 319.4 5.8 312.6 5.6 318.7 5.9 314.7
Tidal gauge Figueira da Foz Peniche

record

(cm) () (cm) () (cm) () (cm) ()
M2 103.3 75.4 100.7 63.2 103.0 69.8 105.6 77.0
S2 36.1 104.1 35.8 88.0 36.0 97.2 37.2 104.8
K1 6.6 63.0 6.3 54.4 7.5 55.6 6.4 61.7
O1 6.1 319.4 5.9 311.5 6.2 315.6 6.0 317.3
Tidal gauge Cascais Sines

record

(cm) () (cm) () (cm) () (cm) ()
M2 98.8 64.2 106.1 77.3 98.5 63.3 105.8 76.0
S2 35.0 90.6 37.2 105.2 34.7 89.4 37.1 103.7
K1 7.0 54.1 6.4 61.8 7.0 54.5 6.3 61.3
O1 6.0 314.5 6.0 317.6 6.2 312.7 6.0 317.1
119
Tidal gauge Lagos
Type of record Tide table Computed values
Constituents Amplitude (cm) Phase () Amplitude (cm) Phase ()
M2 101.7 58.7 105.1 73.9
S2 36.6 85.1 36.9 101.2
K1 7.1 49.1 6.3 60.3
O1 6.1 309.4 6.0 316.2
120
Appendix E Mesh generation
In this appendix the mesh generation size functions used in chapter 6 are described in detail.
There are different operations which can be used to create a reasonable size function. The
used operations will be arithmetic with a physical base meaning such as the wave celerity in
shallow water (tidal waves propagate as shallow water waves).
The operations were applied to the basic elevation dataset in a specific order. The model
boundary is set as the 4m depth contour. The M1 mesh was generated considering an
integrated approach of the Courant Number and the pretended time step. The Courant number
considers the shallow water wave celerity as the propagation speed.
Considering the fact the Courant number influences the model numerical stability if larger than
1, it is conservatively desired that this is smaller than 0.9. Having this in mind the time step is
taken as 30 s.
To create the size function that will allow the generation of the M1 mesh the following steps
were followed sequentially:
Scatter data elevation (SD_ELEV) operation to convert the depth contours smaller than
4m to 4 by applying the following operation SD_4_ELEV=max(4, SD_ELEV); The
following data set will thus range from 4 to 6245,
SD_4_ELEV was applied to compute the dx represented as CN_DX. The operation is
given by CN_DX= , ranging from 208.806 to 8250.49,
Proportionality increase of size in respect to original depth by computing
ranging from 205.963 to 49469.9,
General increase of the size by applying a 1.50 factor to CNDXB thus ranging from
approximately 308.9 to 74204.9.
To create the size function that will allow the generation of the M2 mesh the following steps
were followed sequentially:
Scatter data elevation (SD_ELEV) operation to convert the depth contours smaller than
4m to 4 by applying the following operation SD_4_ELEV=max(4, SD_ELEV); The
following data set will thus range from 4 to 6245,
SD_4_ELEV was applied to compute the dx represented as CN_DX. The operation is
given by CN_DX= , ranging from 417.6 to 16501.0,
Proportionality increase of size in respect to original depth by computing
ranging from 411.9 to 98939.8,
General increase of the size by applying a 1.10 factor to CNDXB thus ranging from
approximately. 453.1 to 108834.0.
121
Appendix F Model calibration for the estuarine domain initial
scenario
WSE - SCN_0_EST - Reference station 3
Observed (HZ) Computed SCN_0_EST (MSL) Computed SCN_0_EST (HZ)
3.50
2.50
1.50
0.50
-0.50
-1.50
11-10-06 0:00 11-10-06 12:00 12-10-06 0:00 12-10-06 12:00 13-10-06 0:00
(a)

3.50
2.50
1.50
0.50
-0.50
-1.50
11-10-06 0:00 11-10-06 12:00 12-10-06 0:00 12-10-06 12:00 13-10-06 0:00
(b)
122
3.50
2.50
1.50
0.50
-0.50
-1.50
11-10-06 0:00 11-10-06 12:00 12-10-06 0:00 12-10-06 12:00 13-10-06 0:00
(c)
Figure F. 1 Measured and computed water surface elevation for (a) Reference station 3, (b)
Reference station 4 and (c) Reference station 5.
Velocity module- SCN_0_EST - Reference station 3
Observed (Velocity) Computed (Velocity)
0.40
Velocity(m/s)
0.20
0.00
11-10-06 0:00 11-10-06 12:00 12-10-06 0:00 12-10-06 12:00 13-10-06 0:00
(a)
123
Velocity module - SCN_0_EST - Reference station 4
1.50
1.20
Velocity(m/s)
0.90
0.60
0.30
0.00
11-10-06 0:00 11-10-06 12:00 12-10-06 0:00 12-10-06 12:00 13-10-06 0:00
(b)
Velocity module - SCN_0_EST - Reference station 5

0.80
0.60
Velocity(m/s)
0.40
0.20
0.00
11-10-06 0:00 11-10-06 12:00 12-10-06 0:00 12-10-06 12:00 13-10-06 0:00
(c)
Figure F. 2 Measured and computed velocity module for (a) Reference station 3, (b) Reference
station 4 and (c) Reference station 5.
124
U, V - SCN_0_EST - Reference station 3
Observed (U) Observed (V) Computed (U) Computed (V)
0.30
0.15
Velocity(m/s)
0.00
-0.15
-0.30
-0.45
11-10-06 0:00 11-10-06 12:00 12-10-06 0:00 12-10-06 12:00 13-10-06 0:00
(a)

Observed (U) Observed (V) Computed (U) Computed (V)
1.00
0.70
Velocity(m/s)
0.40
0.10
-0.20
-0.50
11-10-06 0:00 11-10-06 12:00 12-10-06 0:00 12-10-06 12:00 13-10-06 0:00
(b)

0.75 Observed (U) Observed (V) Computed (U) Computed (V)
0.60
0.45
Velocity(m/s)
0.30
0.15
0.00
-0.15
-0.30
-0.45
-0.60
11-10-06 0:00 11-10-06 12:00 12-10-06 0:00 12-10-06 12:00 13-10-06 0:00
(c)
Figure F. 3 Measured and computed u and v velocity components for (a) Reference station 3, (b)
Reference station 4 and (c) Reference station 5.
125
Direction - SCN_0_EST - Reference station 3
Computed (Direction) Observed (Direction)
360.0
300.0
Angle (deg)
240.0
180.0
120.0
60.0
0.0
11-10-06 0:00 11-10-06 12:00 12-10-06 0:00 12-10-06 12:00 13-10-06 0:00
(a)

360.0
300.0
Angle (deg)
240.0
180.0
120.0
60.0
0.0
11-10-06 0:00 11-10-06 12:00 12-10-06 0:00 12-10-06 12:00 13-10-06 0:00
(b)

360.0
300.0
Angle (deg)
240.0
180.0
120.0
60.0
0.0
11-10-06 0:00 11-10-06 12:00 12-10-06 0:00 12-10-06 12:00 13-10-06 0:00
(c)
Figure F. 4 Measured and computed flow direction for (a) Reference station 3, (b) Reference
station 4 and (c) Reference station 5.
126

Marujo - 2011 - Storm Surge Hydrodynamic Modelling

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Marujo - 2011 - Storm Surge Hydrodynamic Modelling

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Storm surge hydrodynamic modelling

Nuno Ricardo Costa Marujo da Silva

In partial fulfilment of the requirements for obtaining the Degree of

Na presente dissertao o evento de sobreelevao do nvel do mar de origem meteorolgica,

Os resultados obtidos mostram a importncia do coeficiente de atrito em relao aos outros

Palavras-chave: Sobreelevao de origem meteorolgica, Esturio do Rio Lima, modelo

Waves of sound bounce in echoes

Waves of light create sight

Waves of oceans crash and roar

Time step [T]

Mesh element size [L]

Difference in free surface elevation between two points [L]

Latitude, positive North of Equator (degrees)

- Phase of the harmonic constituent i (degrees)

Longitude, positive East of Greenwich (degrees) (chapter 4 excluding section 4.1.3.2);

Wave length (4.1.3.2) [L]

Newtonian equilibrium tidal potential [L]

Angular velocity of the harmonic constituent i

0 Reference density [M/L ]

air Density of air (1.25 kg/ m )

Integration constant designated as Wave continuity factor

bx, by Bottom stresses in x and y directions, respectively [M/T L]

sx, sy Imposed surface stresses in x and y direction, respectively [M/T L]

Free surface elevation [L]

To accomplish this purpose a description of the phenomena and corresponding modelling

1.2 Goals and methodology

Table 2.1 Bathymetry data sources

Lima HIDRODATA 2006 SHGDTLXMIL 65535 20m x 10m

Eiffel HIDRODATA 2006 SHGDTLXMIL 5120 2m x 2m

Estuary HIDRODATA 2004 SHGDTLXMIL 99399 5m x 5m

2.2.1 Coordinate systems description

2.2.2 Available data analysis

Name Area (m2) Area (ha)

Total 2324654 232.465

2.3 Data collection

2.3.1 General aspects

2.3.3 Survey results

Nonetheless, the acquired data was considered to be satisfactory since it allowed an

Position Quality Height quality Combined height and position quality

Maximum difference (cm) 7.5 6.8 9.6

Minimum difference (cm) 0.1 0.1 0.1

Mean (cm) 2.3 1.8 2.9

Standard deviation (cm) 1.4 1.2 1.8

Amplitude (cm) 7.4 6.7 9.5

Position Quality Height Quality Position +Height

Maximum (cm) 14.4 14.8 20.7

Minimum (cm) 0.1 0.1 0.1

Mean (cm) 2.5 2.1 03.3

Standard deviation (cm) 1.9 2.2 02.8

Amplitude (cm) 14.4 14.7 20.5

2.3.4 Local geoidal undulation model

Point name Type H (m) h (m) N (m)

Faro de Anha Triangulation mark 214.63 269.64 55.01

Roques Triangulation mark 309.37 364.41 55.04

S. Silvestre Triangulation mark 339.84 394.88 55.04

NP01 Benchmark 66.26 121.32 55.06

NP04 Benchmark 66.92 121.99 55.07

NP05 Benchmark 65.67 120.75 55.08

NP19 Benchmark 89.41 144.41 55.00

NP27 Benchmark 70.99 126.04 55.05

NP21A Benchmark 110.09 165.09 55.00

Seminrio Benchmark 60.74 115.77 55.03

Name h (m) H(m) N Measured (m) N GEOIDPT08 (m) Differences (m)

Faro de Anha 214.637 159.790 54.847 55.013 -0.166